H.B. 236 Truth in Taxation Amendments: transcript

Thank you. I don't know how many times I've been to this committee, so it's great to be to a new committee. All right. So House Bill 2 36. I think all of us, um, heard from constituents this year, um, and elected officials who, after truth and taxation happened in August. We had packed rooms all across the state and people feeling frustrated that I Uintah the meeting, but I felt like the decision had already been made. And at the same time, we had the elected officials who were saying, we have been working on this budget for months. And everyone showed up at the end. And, and the frustration went both ways. And so, um, having served on a city council and having gone through truth and taxation hearing, then on both sides of that, um, I thought truth and taxation has served us well, but I think we can make it better. And so that's where this bill came from. So, um, chair, I do have a handout that kind of explains it. I don't know if you've got it. She's got it here. If you're okay with me passing it out, please go Ahead and distribute that. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Um, so what this bill does is it, um, aims to bring the public in a little bit earlier, and it also, um, makes sure that when we do have a truth in taxation, hearing that it's more meaningful and the elected officials have an opportunity to respond to the public comment that they have heard. So on the handout, you'll be able to see, I thought this was probably the easiest way to visualize it on the left, is the current process. So, um, you know, walk through how truth and taxation currently happens on the right is what changes this bill would make. So I'm gonna walk through the key changes. The first is, um, when I was on the, when I was on the city council, um, we started working on our budget in, oh goodness, February, March early. We started meeting with our department heads. We had these conversations about, you know, what their needs were. And we knew pretty early on in the process if we were going to have to go through truth and taxation, we had a good idea of where our shortfalls were going to be. So what this says is, as you're going through that process, you're gonna know by about the end of May, if you are going to be raising taxes, and you, in fact, right now, you already have to notify the tax commission that you are considering a tax increase. We want that notice to also go to our public. We want them to know that they're also, um, that you are considering a tax increase and the approximate amount of that tax increase and what you intend to spend that on. So we wanna give the public some notice a little bit earlier that this is happening currently. Then, um, in June, you go through your, um, budget process and you adopt your budget. Right? Now, when you adopt a budget that exceeds the amount of money that you have, that's what triggers a truth and taxation hearing. So what we're saying, um, is when you go through that process in June, we actually want you to adopt two budgets. If you're, if you're interested in raising taxes, and the first budget would be based on your revenue from last year and your growth, and that's it, that's what your budget is based on. If you would like to raise taxes, you can propose an alternative, um, budget that says, this is what you would be buying public. This is what you would get. You can see the difference between if we don't raise taxes, and maybe that means some services have to be cut, um, or some things that you want will go unresolved. Um, but if we, you know, do this tax increase, this is what you are buying, this is what you get, this is how we're growing our government, and I think it will be a lot easier for the public to understand the differences between, um, what the status quo is and where we're going. Um, then on July one, currently you operate on the budget. That is based on your, um, your tax increase going through. That's how it works right now. So on July one, our fiscal year entities, um, they start operating like their, um, they can operate like their taxes passed. Now, some entities hold off, they don't give raises, they don't buy software, they don't do the things and tell truth in taxation, but they are not required to. They're operating on that budget that, that anticipates the tax increase on July one prior to having their truth in taxation. This bill changes that it says no, you operate on your base budget just similar to the legislature that we just passed. Base budgets, you operate on that, that budget, that doesn't contemplate the tax increase starting on July one. Then the notices will go out, like they always will, uh, always do in mid-July. That will not change. Everyone will get that notice. Truth and Taxations hearings will happen in August. And then after that hearing, if the entity decides to still move forward with a tax increase, um, then they can move to the alternative budget. They also can make, uh, amendments to that alternative budget. Um, if they heard, yes, we're down with another police officer, but we don't know about these other increases, they could go up to that, which is similar to how it is now up to, um, that tax increase they had proposed and went through the truth and taxation process on, um, they could then move to whatever budget they would like, um, you know, below, below the, uh, amount they proposed. So that's what the bill does. Um, those are just kind of the technicalities. Um, and I'm open to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Billy Hesterman with the Utah Taxpayers Association, and I wanna speak in favor of this legislation today. And thank Representative Peterson. She has spent more hours than she's probably wanted to spend with all of us talking about this bill and, uh, finding the right way for this to be crafted. And we think that we've found, uh, a legislation that will improve the truth in taxation system. This has been something that has served Utah well for, uh, over 40 years. And it almost has gotten to a point that we've gone, we've had it for so long, there probably isn't anything we can do to make it better. And Representative Peterson has found a way to make it better. Uh, if I could put it another way, if Truth in Taxation was, uh, if you're thinking of video game terms, Mario with Firepower, this is Mario with a star. And, uh, this is, uh, you know, adding more, uh, transparency for the public to be able to see when an entity is looking at increasing the money they're taking from taxpayers, and then making sure that they can't, uh, use some of the excuses that we have heard. Not from all entities, but some, when we go to Truth and Taxation meetings where they've said, well, we have to pass it the way it is because we've already adopted the budget, we're in our budget year. And so it's removing that, that element that can be used of a truth in taxation meeting, being just a formality to actually making it consequential. And that's where we find this significant and find it empowering and hope that you'll move it forward with a favorable vote. So thank you for the time today.

Hello, thank you chair and members of the committee. I'm Mary Catherine Perry. I'm the Executive Vice President of Public Policy and Government Affairs for the Utah Chamber. Um, I am speaking today in favor of Representative Peterson's House Bill 2 36. We are in support of finding thoughtful approaches to how we approach property taxes in Utah, um, especially residential property taxes. What we saw is that as home values went up, um, our, our rates did not go down. And so the reason we support this bill is this bill improves the process, um, and we're asking taxing entities to live within their means. Um, instead of acting as though the rate increased to their constituents, it's just a matter of course, um, it doesn't mean there aren't needs in the communities. It doesn't mean that our schools don't have needs and, and our cities don't have needs. But if you think about it, if you're anticipating a 5% raise at work, and you start spending and borrowing as though you already have the raise, that's not a good approach to personal spending. It's not a good approach to, um, taxing. It's not a good approach to budgeting. And so what you happen, what happens then is you get really high rates. Um, so we appreciate representative Peterson's thoughtful approach to this, uh, way of looking at truth and taxation. We ask for your support of this bill. Thank you.

Uh, Mr. Chair. Justin Lee, deputy Director of Utah League of Cities and Towns. Um, as, as a lead, we have not yet taken a position on this one. Um, but if you look at any of our slides from our meetings, we are working towards support. Um, we wanna thank Representative Peterson. We've had a lot of meetings with her on this one and a lot of discussion, and, and it is a tricky topic. Um, I won't reiterate everything that's been said already. Um, other than to say that it has been a very thoughtful process. Uh, there are a couple of things that make it difficult in the process. Uh, one, the, the May 1st notice is, is a good thing. We think that's, uh, that works well. But do want to point out that cities don't actually know their new growth numbers until early in June. So it, a lot of this is predictive in nature. Now, certainly they start on their budgets earlier than than June 8th, because they don't do it all in a couple of weeks. But they are doing that with, with un incomplete information. So we feel like it is reasonable to say there is a notice there in, in May or early June. But also, everyone needs to understand that the notice is predictive in nature. When those new growth numbers can come in, a city may say, you know, what? New growth covers what we, what we thought we needed, so we won't have to move forward, or, this is lower than we thought. We may have to go even more than we thought we would, depending what those needs are. Uh, the other piece about preparing the two budgets has, has given a little bit consternation. Um, but we, we are, again, we're, we're comfortably uncomfortable going down this road, um, of looking at this. Uh, it, it is a lot of work, as you know, for, for the staff that you have here, the legislature preparing multiple budgets, making changes to that. There's a lot of negotiation that goes on, um, not just between staff, but between elected officials on the council in a, in a strong mayor form of government. The, the, the of government. The mayor presents a budget, and then the council starts fiddling around with it, uh, similar to what you do with the governor's budget here. Um, so there's, there's a lot going on there. And preparing those two budgets is a lot of work. But we do understand the need, uh, to make sure that the public's input is meaningful when we get to that final hearing in August, and that it's not a done deal, that we haven't already spent all the money and there's no choice. So again, we are, we're comfortably and comfortable we're working towards support on this one, and appreciate the work that Representative Peterson has done. Um, and we'll continue, continue working with her.

Thanks. Good afternoon. My name is Kristen Hogan, and I live in Syracuse, Utah. Thank you for allowing me to address the House Revenue and Taxation Committee concerning HB 2 36. I currently serve on the Davis School Board of Education, but I am speaking for myself and do not represent the board or Davis School District. I am here in support of the amendments proposed in HB 2 36 as a member of a taxing entity that engaged in truth and taxation process this past year. I believe the amendments proposed in this bill will improve the truth in taxation process and create a win-win situation for both the taxpayer and the tax authority. These amendments specifically address the difficulties I experienced this past year. The number one frustration expressed to us from our constituents was the general sense that the decision had already been made and finalized before the public input at the hearing. Having served on our finance finance committee, I can testify that the complexities of a school district's budget require months of work ahead of time gathering budget priorities from departments, negotiating with our associations, and working through board priorities out of necessity. We consider early if a tax increase is warranted, as has been discussed, the proposed preliminary statement in a public meeting in May will ensure the public has opportunity to respond and engage in the process earlier. Hopefully, it will incentivize taxpayers to engage with the board sooner when budget decisions are still being considered. Each year. We hold a, a budget hearing in June where we adopt the final budget from the previous school year and consider the tentative budget for the upcoming year. This would be the ideal time to receive feedback on our proposed budget. During the three years I've been serving on the Davis School Board, we have not had a single constituent give comment at our pub, at our budget hearing in June. I also support the amendment requiring the adoption of two tentative budgets for those considering truth and taxation, one without the additional funds generated by the tax increase, and one that includes the additional funds. In my opinion, this allows any interested parties to view the differences and form a more complete picture of the two options. This provides transparency to the public, but also helps the governing entity to make their case of why a tax increase might be necessary. Overall, I think these amendments will improve the truth and taxation process for everyone involved. Thank you for allowing me to speak today.

It took me off one screen and put me on another. I don't know why. Apologize for that. I have had the privilege of, uh, being able to, uh, be part of a committee that, uh, representative,

I'm so sorry. Yeah. Joy Peters, I'm the Twila County Assessor and currently the, uh, policy Steering Committee co-chair of the Rev and Tax Committee. Thank You. Um, I am speaking for my personal experience, but I can also tell you that uco UAC is supportive of this, and it has been discussed not only in the steering committee, but also, um, as the UAC board, as we took a vote to, um, support this bill. Uh, I feel as well as those that have the discussions together at uac, um, and or at the capital as uac, that this is something that is making everything more clear. She's worked very diligently on trying to put together something that will not only provide a clearer path and a better path for the cities and the, and taxing entities, but I also believe mechanisms where the counties can assist and more readily and help with that. And I'm looking forward to that. So I wholeheartedly, personally and professionally support this. And I will, uh, look forward to when this is passed. Thank you for your time Chair and committee.

I move that we favorably recommend. Um, sorry, which bill Was this? 2 36. Uh, house bill 2 36 with thank you. With a favorable recommendation with the Favor. I think I said with, I move that we favorably Recommend. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay. With a favorable recommendation. Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Favorably. I I didn't think it was unfavorable, but you know, very favorably.

To respond to the motion. Yes. Uh, I appreciate the motion. And, and maybe just one comment. Um, you know, that there, there was a concern about are you are creating more work? And, and what became alarming to me is, well, what's our plan B, if your tax increase isn't gonna go, what was your plan B guys like, I, I feel like plan B is a good idea. And, and, and when we are creating a little bit more work to be more transparent with the public, it feels like worth work worth doing. So thanks.

I just wanted to thank the sponsor for her work on this. It's, I think it's an excellent change to a process that could just use a little more transparency and a Tweak that I think will make it better for everyone. Thank you for your work

Thank you. Again. I want to thank you for this work. So I was in the county government as a senior policy advisor for a commissioner. So I was intimately involved in helping to develop the budget and also as a recommend as a representative of the people in both, both then and now. I'm looking at how they did really feel that they would never listen to. So this is exceptionally, uh, an improvement. And I really am, I'm appreciative. I'm very in favor of this. Thank you so much. Mm-hmm.

Thank you. You guys have been thorough today. I'm excited. Um, so this bill came about because I think I heard from my constituents we're probably, you heard from your constituents this fall, which is, uh, many of them Uintah Truth and Taxation hearings and felt like, um, that the decision had already been made before they showed up and they felt frustrated by that. At the same time I heard from elected officials who said, um, it feels like the public is coming in too late in the process. Like we've, we've been meeting with our budget committee for six months and, and, um, they're just coming here at the end. And, and so it felt like to me that truth and taxation has served us well. It's a good process. Um, but there might be some opportunities to, um, improve that process to kind of resolve those two concerns. So the bill itself is fairly simple and what it does is it, um, to components that I think are gonna be important. The first is that if a public entity, and this is fiscal year entities, um, so it's your school districts, it is, um, cities, it is some special service districts. If, um, they're, they're contemplating a tax increase, they need to, um, to discuss that in a public meeting earlier. So this would have them do that in May. Um, at that point, they know that they're probably going to be contemplating a tax increase. They've gone through their budget, um, workshop processes, and they have a good, uh, um, idea of the approximate amount of tax increase and also to do the notification to the tax commission. Then in June, when they normally adopt their budget, if they're not going to raise taxes, they adopt the budget they have, they are no, as they always have. If they are going to raise taxes, then, um, the bill requires two budgets. The first would be an operating budget. So the operating budget is, is what their budget looks like without a tax increase. So it would include growth. They could contemplate the growth in there, um, and say, this is what our budget would look like. Um, and then second, they'd provide the public with this is what the budget looks like if our tax increase goes through This gives the opportunity for the public to see what they're buying, to see the difference between what happens if we don't have a tax increase and what happens if we do. And um, and then on July one, currently our entities go ahead and operate with the budget, with the tax increase in it. This would require on July 1st that they start operating on the budget. That's the operating budget. That does not include the tax increase. So, um, that couldn't be, um, they couldn't move to the budget with a tax increase until after they had held their truth in taxation hearing. So this helps, um, things happen, not happen. For example, uh, like people not getting hired yet until we know that the tax increase is really going through, uh, maybe we don't make certain purchases, um, while we wait for that truth and taxation hearing. So hopefully when the public comes, both the elected officials don't feel like, I don't know what we're going to do if we don't raise taxes. 'cause we've already gone down this road. Um, and the public feels like they really can give meaningful input. So the bill's pretty simple. That's what it does. And I'm open to any questions.

I, I like a lot of what's in here. One of my questions is how tied to carrying out the budget would they need to be? So for example, if they put a bunch of things that are basically, and we're gonna use like a bad scenario, but it's like, um, you know, this is how we, you know, we're including in our, if we get the tax increase, then we're gonna save all the drowning puppies. Right. You know? Mm-hmm. And, and, and then, you know, if they don't do it, you know, then they still save the, the drowning puppies. But they Right. You know, they put the candy in the budget as part of what's on the block. Do they have to follow through on that? Or if they don't do it, do they go back and amend it? So, I mean, their, their base budget is going to be their base budget. Right. They have to operate on that base budget. So if they're trying to show some sort of dire circumstance, they're gonna have to operate like their dire circumstances through their tax truth and taxation hearing. Right. Um, and so, um, it's, it's not a perfect safeguard, but it is some level of safeguard to say, um, we want you to be honest with your public about what it means for a tax increase and what it doesn't. Um, let them know how you're growing government, or how, how you're just making ends meet because costs have gotten higher. Yeah. So, so the intent is to have the truly necessary things that they would follow through on in following that budget. And it would be outside of the intent of the legislation if they were to manipulate their budget to make a tax increase more, uh, desired. Is that a fair way to put it?

So, um, yes. I, I would say it probably is a little bit, I mean, they're, they're gonna have to just show the difference, right. They're gonna have to show this is what you're, you know, what, what we'd move to. And then they would still have to move to that budget in a public hearing. Um, so it's the truth And taxation wouldn't trigger that move. They would still have to hold a budget hearing to move to a different budget. Okay. And it still caps the amount they can't go higher than they were would before. Same as it is now. Yeah.

Okay. No, thank you. I appreciate that.

William Hesterman iii, please. It's the second. So close. Uh, Billy Hesterman with the Utah Taxpayers Association want to, uh, speak in favor of this legislation. Representative Peterson has been wonderful to work with. She's had to sit in a room with many of us for six months now, uh, talking about what we can do to improve truth and taxation and, um, especially having to deal with me who thinks truth and taxation is, uh, you know, uh, as good as baseball and apple Piute. And, uh, so finding something that we could be excited about and how we can improve it was a little difficult, but we think we found it. Where these are things that, uh, may seem like they're, they're minor moves, but they're moves that we do believe will improve the transparency of the process and get our, uh, residents involved sooner, and allow taxpayers to have a little more opportunity to see what's happening in the budget of their city or their school district, or their special service district, and making sure that they can be involved and informed when the truth in taxation hearing comes in August. So, because of those reasons, we hope you'll vote for it and move it forward to the full Senate. Thank you.

Hello, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I'm Mary Catherine Perry, executive Vice President of Public Policy and Government Affairs for the Utah Chamber. We want to thank Representative Peterson and ask for your support of House Bill 2 36. We're in support of finding thoughtful solutions to rising property taxes, um, at all levels, and strengthening the truth and taxation process. It doesn't mean there aren't needs, doesn't mean that our schools don't have needs, but we think about an, think about anticipating a 5% raise at work. You wouldn't start borrowing and spending based on a raise you think you're gonna get. We think it's better process to anticipate both scenarios. Um, I would also like to point out that a 2022 audit, legislative audit requested by your body pointed out that a school district with rapidly declining enrollment and one of the highest taxed property areas in the state, the audit pointed out that two property tax increases could likely have been avoided if elementary schools had been half empty. Elementary schools have been closed. So we support strengthening transparency in the truth and taxation process. We appreciate Representative Peterson's efforts, and we ask for your support of this bill. Thank

Executive Vice President of Public Policy and Government Affairs for the Utah Chamber. Thank you for that Opportunity. Does that fit on one card, or is that It, does the types card thing? Very, very, very small.

Thanks. Yeah. I'm here for you.

Yeah, I would move that we recommend favorably HB 2 36 for substitute.

Yeah, I think it's a great bill. I like the, I, I think it makes sense. It, it brings more solid budgeting principles to the table, um, and more transparency. And so I really appreciate the bill. Thank you.

Um, no, I appreciate their consideration and appreciate the motion.

We're close, we're close to peace in the land.

consideration. Madam Marine Clerk House Bill 2 36, truth and Taxation amendments by representative Corinne Peterson. This bill was heard in revenue and taxation with vote 10 0 1

Representative Peterson, Uh, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to move First substitute.

Yes. So this difference between the original bill and the substitute is the number of entities reached out and said, you've made it clear what happens if we want to raise taxes. It's not as clear as if, if we don't want to raise taxes what we need to do. And I, I'd prefer entities not raise taxes. So we clarified that for them.

Thank you. So I think colleagues, many of us heard from constituents who attended Truth and Taxations hearings this fall and felt a lot of frustration. They felt often that the decision had already been made before they even got to the meeting. Um, we also heard frustrations from elected officials who said, we followed the process, but by the time we invite the public in, we are pretty far down the road. And, uh, having heard those concerns from my constituents and probably many of yours as well, um, I Uintah work on some legislation that would try to bring the public in a little bit earlier so they would know a tax increase is even being considered. And second, it would, uh, make sure that the decision hadn't been made when that August truth and taxation hearing happens. So what this bill does, it does two really specific things that I think are going to be important. The first is, if an entity is considering raising taxes, they need to notify their public in May, so their public will know in May that they are considering a tax increase. While that is before they receive growth numbers and all of that, they do have a good idea about how much more they're going to need to, um, raise taxes to provide essential services in their community. So, uh, they'll need to notify. So that's the first change. So they'll need to notify their public earlier they're considering a tax change and with what that approximate change will be. The second thing that it does is it says on July one, when a fiscal year entity usually starts their budget. The current process is that they get to, uh, assume that that property tax has already passed and operate on a budget that assumes the property tax is going to happen. Uh, what this bill says is, starting on July one, you can operate on a base budget on an operating budget that is just based on the revenue that you already have. And if your tax increase is approved in August, then you can move to, uh, a budget that, uh, has the tax increase in it. This does two things. First of all, it lets the public actually have a say in that Truth and Taxation hearing in August because it hasn't already happened. And second, it gives the public an opportunity to look at the difference between the base budget and the budget that the entity is proposing and see what they're buying. They can see if they're getting another police officer, they're gonna see, um, if they don't do it, what happens, uh, to their city's budget. So, um, that's what this bill requires and provides, and I hope it will be, uh, make the public have a more meaningful opportunity to give public input when we have truth in taxation hearings. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I'm open to any questions.

Thank you. Uh, I just think that this bill will help us be more responsive to those concerns that we heard. We want public input. Our local entities need public input as they determine their budgets and having them come to the process a little bit early, having our entities figure out a plan B if their tax increase doesn't pass and knowing what they're going to do is also a lot better process for them. So I'll, without I'd ask for your support. Thank you.

Representative Peterson, Uh, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to move First substitute.

Yes. So this difference between the original bill and the substitute is the number of entities reached out and said, you've made it clear what happens if we want to raise taxes. It's not as clear as if, if we don't want to raise taxes what we need to do. And I, I'd prefer entities not raise taxes. So we clarified that for them. Like a good substitute discussion to that motion to adopt to the motion to adopt for substitute on HB 2 36.

Thank you. So I think colleagues, many of us heard from constituents who attended Truth and Taxations hearings this fall and felt a lot of frustration. They felt often that the decision had already been made before they even got to the meeting. Um, we also heard frustrations from elected officials who said, we followed the process, but by the time we invite the public in, we are pretty far down the road. And, uh, having heard those concerns from my constituents and probably many of yours as well, um, I Uintah work on some legislation that would try to bring the public in a little bit earlier so they would know a tax increase is even being considered. And second, it would, uh, make sure that the decision hadn't been made when that August truth and taxation hearing happens. So what this bill does, it does two really specific things that I think are going to be important. The first is, if an entity is considering raising taxes, they need to notify their public in May, so their public will know in May that they are considering a tax increase. While that is before they receive growth numbers and all of that, they do have a good idea about how much more they're going to need to, um, raise taxes to provide essential services in their community. So, uh, they'll need to notify. So that's the first change. So they'll need to notify their public earlier they're considering a tax change and with what that approximate change will be. The second thing that it does is it says on July one, when a fiscal year entity usually starts their budget. The current process is that they get to, uh, assume that that property tax has already passed and operate on a budget that assumes the property tax is going to happen. Uh, what this bill says is, starting on July one, you can operate on a base budget on an operating budget that is just based on the revenue that you already have. And if your tax increase is approved in August, then you can move to, uh, a budget that, uh, has the tax increase in it. This does two things. First of all, it lets the public actually have a say in that Truth and Taxation hearing in August because it hasn't already happened. And second, it gives the public an opportunity to look at the difference between the base budget and the budget that the entity is proposing and see what they're buying. They can see if they're getting another police officer, they're gonna see, um, if they don't do it, what happens, uh, to their city's budget. So, um, that's what this bill requires and provides, and I hope it will be, uh, make the public have a more meaningful opportunity to give public input when we have truth in taxation hearings. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I'm open to any questions.

Thank you. Uh, I just think that this bill will help us be more responsive to those concerns that we heard. We want public input. Our local entities need public input as they determine their budgets and having them come to the process a little bit early, having our entities figure out a plan B if their tax increase doesn't pass and knowing what they're going to do is also a lot better process for them. So I'll, without I'd ask for your support. Thank you.

Yes. The substitute makes some changes after working with stakeholders, uh, to improve the process on how the initial budget is proposed.

Yes. Um, this adds further clarifications to lines 1 74, uh, about a property impact schedule. Uh, and there's definitions in the bill about what comp is what constitute a property impact tax, uh, impact schedule. And then also clarifies, uh, the fiscal year taxing entities, uh, proposed rate increase as it relates to, um, as it replaced to the, uh, to the subdivision.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I wanna applaud the sponsor. Representative Peterson has done a phenomenal job on this. Bill worked hard with stake stakeholders and worked with the cities, uh, and with the counties to try and find a process, um, that creates more transparency and, uh, creates more, um, available information for taxpayers. Um, in this truth and taxation. In this new truth and taxation or improved truth and taxation process, the citizens will get better notice, they will get better information, and they themselves will have the opportunity, uh, to weigh in and also help make decisions as to how, if there is a, a taxation, how that revenue will be spent. Um, for the most part, uh, this process is going to be, is one that is consensus, uh, and is broad based consensus. And that is the, uh, tribute to the house sponsor who's done a phenomenal job leading this through. I've been following each of these changes and listening to the debate as it goes through. And honestly, um, it, these are impressive changes that we're gonna be making to the process. And I think the one thing that we're gonna learn the most out of this process, that we're gonna have entities that are gonna get more support from their taxpayers for their budget and be more successful in communicating with their taxpayers what their tax dollars are actually doing. And so that transparency is, uh, is going to be, we believe foundational change and, uh, very, a big improvement for the state's process. And with that, Mr. President, I'm happy, happy to yield to questions.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'll move the second substitute house bill 2 36 Truth and taxation amendments, uh, as amended pass under suspension of the rules.

Yes. Thank you President. Um, when we, uh, af when we passed the bill last time and favorably recommended it and everybody moved forward, it was a great bill. Uh, right after we passed it, we got a notification from the tax commission that there was a difficulty administration in administering how the bill, uh, language called out boards that are not, not managed with an exec, like more boards that don't have an executive, um, like, you know, like a city for example, uh, in some forms of government. And so we had to come back reshuffle a little bit and work on it. Uh, really what uh, really the change we ended up making is fairly minor and um, makes it so that uh, it basically just changes who is the principal and when they're considered. And I think what it the net effect will be is that mayor budgets will not generally before the month of may, uh, result in a proposal to raise property taxes. So for that purpose I've made the sub and then we also caught a small drafting piece. And so after the sub, I have to run an amendment to fix that part of it. And then I think this bill will be fully baked and ready to go.

Thank you President. Motion to amend

Yes. Uh, I needed to change, I need the, uh, in moving amendment one to third sub line. And if you'll notice on line 1 93, we just have the wrong Paradise, we have the wrong subparagraph. Um, highlighted instead of four B, it needs to be four C And that's the purpose of the amendment C amendment one in your name.

Under third sub under

President. If I, if there's no action, I'll make a motion to pass.

Third substitute house bill 2 36. Truth and taxation. Thank

Thank you President. I'll move the third substitute house bill 2 36. Truth and taxation amendments as amended pass under suspension of the rules.

Thank you Mr. President. This bill creates a definition for recovery, operations

Uh, there were two changes to the bill in the Senate. Um, both that I, I worked with the stakeholders on the first was how they're gonna operationalize, holding their budgets, um, so that they don't use money that they don't have yet because they haven't gone through truth in taxation. That was resolved in this, uh, substitute as well as the technical change requested from the tax commission.