H.B. 484 Property Tax Changes: transcript

House Revenue and Taxation Committee, Feb 19, 2026

1. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:05:29

   Uh, onto the last item on the agenda, HB 4 84, uh, property tax changes by Representative Christofferson.

2. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:05:53

   Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair and committee. Uh, so this last year, I think most of my emails that I got during the, during the year was about property taxes and, uh, And what can people do? And one of the things that, uh, people would say is, yeah, we, we can go, uh, to the truth and taxation hearings and that, but we never get heard. And, and people and the county leaders just do what they want. And then we have this big tax, and, and, and, and then some people say, well, nobody did anything about the tax for years. And then all of a sudden, like we saw in our county a huge tax proposal that was over a hundred percent, and then they did drop that down to like 67% or something. And that is just, um, That is just hard for people to adjust to. And especially people on fixed incomes, uh, people who are trying to plan for the next year, they can't make those big jumps. And as I thought about this, I, I thought, well, we could just maybe say, well, let's just go to, let's just cap the property tax that counties or taxing entities, uh, school districts, uh, can, can raise property tax by the cost of living, or maybe two and a half percent. And then I thought, well, no, 'cause there are probably some legitimate needs that, that they might have that are more expensive. And so I thought, well, why don't we cap this at 5%? That gives a little bit of increase for, um, for the cost of living and maybe some, some more needs that the taxiing entities might have. Uh, and they don't have to go up to 5% if they don't want to. They can just leave it the same way. They're gonna go 1% or 2%, but this caps it at 5%. And then if they really have a big need that they say, we need 12%, then they can just say, they can make a notification. They want to go 12% and take it to a vote of the, their constituency. And so before, uh, before they make that budget, they, they can go through the process a, a year in advance or whatever it takes and say, we're gonna take this to the people. Let them decide, uh, if, if a 12% increase is acceptable. And then that way they have a little more, um, assurance that things are gonna jump around so much. And it, and it makes it so that the leaders of those, um, organizations or those entities, uh, you know, have the courage to say, we need to stay up on this if we need it, or we need to make the cuts, but to not do anything because of political pressure. And then all of a sudden somebody's in a panic and they've gotta jump it up to, you know, a, a 30% increase. I don't think that's acceptable. Um, the other thing that the bill does is, uh, and, uh, it, it deals with the voted board, uh, voted and board local levy programs for the schools. And there's an equalization program for these schools. But for the state to participate in that equalization program, the, uh, the, uh, LEAs have to have some skin in the game. And, and what we've said in the past is you have to have, uh, 0.2% or 0.002 basis points, and then you qualify. And, uh, representative Kyle's bill extended that. There was an exec exemption that says, you don't need to do that for five years. And my bill does kind of the opposite. Mine just says, we're not gonna give you right now, it's a one year exemption. And I just said, no, let's just not have that exemption, because I want school districts to be able to say, if, if we're gonna be in the game, we need to be there, and I don't want to wait and wait and wait. And then all of a sudden the school district has a big increase. So this basically just says, look, we want something that's consistent, that's standardized and accountable to the voters. Uh, and I know those people who, uh, depend on taxes aren't gonna like it because it ties their hands a little bit with, with the voters, but the voters are really getting tired of getting slammed with high, uh, increases. And so, um, you know, there's, there's other, other ways that you can look at, uh, controlling property taxes, but I thought this was a fair way. It gives the taxing entities a little bit of leeway, but it keeps, uh, major jumps from happening. And it, it, uh, makes the current administration accountable for the decisions to pay for, for their needs in those entities. And, uh, so I think, I think that's, uh, the bill. So if you have any questions, I'll be glad to entertain them.

3. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:11:58

   Okay. Uh, th thank you, uh, Representative Christofferson. Um, we will come back to the committee for discussion. While I'm waiting for any lights, I'm gonna offer a little bit of commentary related to your bill.

4. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:12:14

   Sure. Um, I received some interesting news today related to property taxes. This goes back to a related issue. We know there's been a, a shift between residential and commercial, and we've had numerous discussions about disclosure. I've been assured those issues have been fixed, but I just learned today of a private transaction that I was aware of in my private life. And so I can called up an assessor and said, tell me what was reported to you about the sale price. No disclosure whatsoever for this small city. It was a $25 million undervaluation on the commercial side. So, so I commend you for looking at ways to address some of our property tax issues, because in this case, the citizens, the private homeowners in that city are paying a lot more because of our lack of disclosure laws. So there's that. Um, good point.

5. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:13:10

   In the meantime, I've, I've had a few light that was just a comment, not a question. In the meantime, I've given people, uh, time to come up with some questions. So we will go to Representative Shepherd.

6. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:13:21

   Thank you. Uh, happy birthday. Oh, thank you. Just wanted to say it. Hopefully that's not on order, but

7. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:13:28

   No, you can make a mortar, uh, uh, you can make a motion to sing Happy birthday, but we'll reserve that for later. Okay.

8. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:13:34

   Okay. That would be out of order. So on the whole premise of it, I really like it. Um, I have some reservations though, and, uh, some of 'em you're aware of. Um, I'm not really sure that this is workable. As far as timing goes, counties, they adopt their budgets in December. Cities adopt theirs in either June or July. I don't remember when the school boards do, but I, I believe it's probably in the June timeframe. So if they would needed to go over 5%, then I'm just not sure on the timing of going to the voters and when that would happen, and what timeframe do they have to get to the, get it to the county clerk, uh, to be able to get it onto a ballot. And so I'm just kind of wondering if you have any solutions for that. And, um, and working, I worked at Utah County Government and 127% tax increase that was suggested by the clerk auditor back in 2019. Um, it was, you were right, it was over a hundred percent, and then it went down to 67%, and the, there was a referendum, uh, but they didn't get enough signatures. And that really did make some people pretty upset, you know, that they were going that high. Um, but there was really nothing they could do about it. And it took a, an election, um, and got rid of one of the commissioners that was an incumbent, uh, took an election to have the next commissioners come in and actually cut that tax increase in half. Um, so I think that we need to make sure that we are vetting our candidates about how they're going to spend money, how they're going to budget money. Um, you know, I would take a look at, uh, we had a $50,000 increase in county commissioner pay in three and a half years in Utah County per commissioner. So I think expenses, uh, just the reality and, and what the public will is okay with, and I think we need to really take a look at that. I just think this one is, it's really, I'm just trying to figure out how we can make it workable if it can apply for the following year. But I know in the county, they don't even start talking about the budget until about June, and that's when they start having the department head meetings and all the meetings to, to meet and determine what they need. And then the, the county auditor then puts forward a budget and it just goes from there. And so, I'm just trying to figure out how we can work this. Do you have a solution for that on your birthday?

9. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:16:12

   Well, yeah. You have to, you have to plan ahead and anticipate what your costs are. Most, most entities can look ahead and see what, where they've been, what funds they have, they plan ahead for projects. And if they believe that they're gonna have an increase, then they need to just, uh, you know, more than 5%, then they need to put that on the ballot, uh, for the next, next election cycle, whatever, that they can fit in, and then do their budget after that, or, you know, propose it after that.

10. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:16:50

    I had another question that jumped on my green.

11. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:16:52

    Do you have another question, representative? I, I did. Well, we can come back to you. We'll go to Representative Nen in the meantime.

12. Rep. Hoang Nguyen1:16:59

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I have a couple of comments, really. So, we recently in the house passed a bill by representative Corinne Peterson that made it so that the, um, truth and taxation process is more transparent in the passed 72 0, now it's in the Senate for consideration. And that was an important legislation to make sure that that, uh, constituents, that people who live in the communities know when, when, and why taxes are being raised and get to give their public comment when it comes to property tax. That is the only taxing control that cities, uh, have to be able to really control, you know, have for their budget, generate funds to pay for the operations of the city. If we limit how much the, you know, the leaderships that are elected along the same line of what, um, Representative Shepherd saying there are, these are elected officials to, uh, make the decisions that to best manage their city. And if we cap how much they can tax when they are the ones who are the closest to the issues, who understands the challenges of what's the, the biggest need of the city. I really think it's, it's a big hindrance to cities to be able to function properly. Like I said, they have the truth in taxation process that we're trying to make better, where citizens can come and, and give their comments. I just don't like the fact that we're taking away the ability for local officials to be able to make the right decision for their communities. Thank you.

13. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:18:44

    Okay. Thank you, Representative Koford.

14. Rep. Jill Koford1:18:48

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I so appreciate what you're trying to do. I hear about property taxes on repeat, and I know that I've shared this, that on many, in many places, in many times, I have in my district, people whose property taxes over the last five years have, have gone up an astronomical amount. These are you, these are, are homes in South Ogden and Washington Terrace, where the home values have just skyrocketed. And their, and their property taxes have kept up and largely because of the increase in the rate on the, on the local level. Um, my question and my, my, my question is, if we, if we tell cities and municipalities that they're capped at 5%, isn't that an incentive to have them take that full amount every single year, rather than looking for ways to cut back and to be more transparent and to perhaps do what Representative Shepherd said? Talk about where the money is going and the transparency. I mean, I think one of the best, um, metrics for government oversight is transparency. When, when I look at some of our neighboring states that have instituted caps on taxes like this, that then go to the vote of the people, they're struggling financially. So I, I appreciate what you're wanting to do. I, I struggle thinking that we're, we're hitting the wrong incentive, that we're now incentivizing the local governments to take an increase every single year at that max to try to offset any potential shortfalls. So I just wonder if you could speak to that a little bit if you thought through that.

15. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:20:19

    Yeah, and that's, that's a concern really. I've thought. I've thought about that. Does that incentivize them or does it hold 'em back? And, you know, they still have to go through the truth and taxation to get up to the 5%, and they can do that, so they're accountable that way. Um, but it's kind of a trade off. Yeah. I mean, does that incentivize 'em to do more than they need to? But at least you know that it's happening in segments where you can say, uh, you know, let's do something about this before it jumps up. So, uh, it may incentivize some of 'em to do it every year, but then they still have to face their voters. Uh, and, uh, but, you know, at least it limits 'em on how much they can do. So it, it's, I don't know. It's a balancing act.

16. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:21:14

    Okay. Thank you, uh, Representative Strong. Um, let's try the microphone next to you. That light was on too. Okay. All right.

17. Rep. Mark A. Strong1:21:36

    Um, Representative Christofferson. So, um, back when I first ran in 2018, we had a citizen led initiative around Medicaid and expanding Medicaid. Um, we were able to keep that in check, but what if we had, uh, let's say an initiative that passed that had, you know, wide support, but it was gonna cost us more than 5%. Or let's say we had a large inflation year. I mean, we had, we've had a couple, um, which has caused part of the whole issue you're trying to, to work on here. How would we as a legislature handle it if we had restrictions like this?

18. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:22:28

    Well, I mean, if you have an initiative, it's the same thing as taking it to the people for a vote. I mean, it's a similar deal. You take it to, to the people a after a certain level. But, you know, if we had that same restriction on us here, I know that in after 2008, uh, the legislature really had to buckle down and they cut programs. They just right sized the government. That's all they had. They used rainy day funds, and then they cut a lot of programs. And luckily we had a pretty good economy, but sometimes those kind of restrictions force people to, to cut programs and costs that we really don't need. And it makes them take the hard decisions.

19. Rep. Mark A. Strong1:23:12

    Yeah, agreed. So in my little town of Bluffdale, our city council passed a, uh, a tax increase and it Uintah a referendum and it was passed. And so the city had to go back to the drawing board. So how does the referendum lever play into this? I mean, there's kind of a, uh, a spirit of referendum abroad in the land, you know, and so, uh, they, they try and say, well, we're gonna raise this 2, 3, 4, 5%, and they get a referendum, they get a referendum year after year after year, and they're kind of back in the same thing. And then now they're actually in more legitimate need, and they can only do 5%.

20. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:23:57

    Yeah. If it's a, if it's, you know, 3% increase and they do a referendum, they can do that. But if it goes to 7% increase, it's gotta go to the vote of the people anyway. So you don't really need a referendum. Okay. I mean, they could, I guess.

21. Rep. Mark A. Strong1:24:13

    Interesting. Okay. Good, good. Thanks. Like, I like the concept. This.

22. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:24:20

    Okay. Thank you. Uh, scene over for the lights on the committee, we'll go to public discussion. Who's here to comment on this bill? Okay. I think we have, we have two online. Let's start out with, uh, the first, what online? Chris Stavros, while our, if the two in person can come up and sit at the witness stand and sign, sign in, please. Uh, uh, Chris, uh, the type is yours. If you can tell us your name and who you represent and where you're coming from per legislative rule, even though most of us know, we would appreciate it.

23. Chris Stavros, Salt Lake County Assessor1:24:51

    Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Chris Stavros, the current Salt Lake County assessor, and I just wanna make sure that all the committee members know, and, uh, that they're aware of that the 5% cap on budgeted property tax revenue would be detrimental to the bond ratings of the taxing entities involved. So, bottom line, that 5% cap on budgeted property tax revenue would hurt taxing entities, their bond ratings. And I thought that was important to point out. Thank you.

24. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:25:29

    Oh, thank you. Um, in, in fairness, I'm just gonna ask the sponsor if he wishes to respond to that, since I think that's an important issue. If he believes that this could impact bond ratings.

25. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:25:42

    Um, it could. I don't know. I, I, I think, uh, I think that if the county is financially responsible and they keep up with this, I think they'll be in good shape. I don't, it, it, it may make some uncertainty to bonding companies to say, well, the, the leaders of the taxing entity aren't in charge, and it could fluctuate because what we're counting on is increases, uh, that they've talked about. But, uh, I don't think it'll, I really don't think it'll hurt that much because we're not saying that the citizens are gonna back off on the taxes. We're just saying that they approve or not approve an increase. And so, I, I just think this helps with accountability to say we're not gonna have these big increases, but I don't think it's gonna hurt the flow of the taxes coming in to that entity. But it, it may hurt the bonding, uh, rating a little bit.

26. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:26:53

    Okay. Thank you. Uh, Representative Koford, do you have a question for the witness? I, I do. I wasn't Or The public, sorry, not the witness. Yeah. Member of the public for The member, yes. Okay.

27. Rep. Jill Koford1:27:02

    So, Chris, are you still with us?

28. Chris Stavros, Salt Lake County Assessor1:27:05

    I was just, yes, I'm still here.

29. Rep. Jill Koford1:27:06

    Okay. Thank you. Chris, I was just hoping maybe you could explain just in a little more detail how and why that impacts the bonding. What, what's that correlation or why does that happen?

30. Chris Stavros, Salt Lake County Assessor1:27:19

    Well, anytime you have a cap on revenue like that, what, for example, Salt Lake County has a triple, triple A bond rating, and it may inhibit their ability to bond. I mean, it's just, that's how, how it works. And, you know, I i I, I do think it is an issue that is very significant and I think you guys really need to look at that with regard to this legislation.

31. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:27:45

    Okay. Alright. Uh, does that answer your question? Yes. Okay. Alright. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, let's go to, why don't we go to our next pub or next online witness, and then we'll go to, we'll save the folks, uh, in person here for last, uh, uh, Michelle Polish. Can you hear us? Michelle? I can, Can you please tell us, uh, yeah. Name, where you're coming from and who you represent?

32. Mischelle Polish, resident1:28:12

    Yep. So I represent myself. I live in Draper, Utah, and my name is Michelle Polish. Um, I love this bill. I know obviously as a taxpayer and, and, um, you know, just a, a regular citizen that we've seen, just some enormous tax increases. And I think it's wonderful, um, to have a cap. I am concerned what I just heard, that would we really be more concerned with a bond rating dropping from AAA to AA than we are with tax burden and fiscal accountability? I mean, as a citizen, we have to constantly budget. We have to constantly be concerned. I understand we have a representative government, but we have a spending problem. I mean, we have, I mean, you guys do as good as you can on the budget, but we over collect many, many times. And that money goes straight to the general fund. I think that it's okay to tighten, tighten up, be more accountable, and 5%, I mean, when some of these tax increases are huge. I, I don't know. I just really wish that you guys would consider this and, and hopefully support it. And that's it. Okay.

33. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:29:29

    Thank you Michelle. Appreciate your time. Okay. We will go to our in-person witnesses. Uh, I'll let you decide who goes first.

34. Todd Hauber, Granite School District1:29:38

    We all pointing at me. My name's Todd Halber. I'm the business administrator for Grant school district and, uh, the legislative liaison for U Asbo, I wanted to speak in opposition to the bill. One thing in, uh, that is concerning in the bill is, is a misperception of how the voted and board guarantee works. It was described that the, that the school districts need to have skin in the game and that it should be at least a oh oh two. The statute actually is a oh oh two is the maximum of increments that can be guaranteed. So the school districts are actually in the, in the game at the very first increment and can only receive guarantee up to the first 20 increments. There are districts who impose more and those above the oh oh two do not receive any guarantee for those increments. So that, for that reason, this bill's a little bit challenging in that when the certified rate drops or when the it causes the tax rate to drop, that means that there are fewer increments eligible for the guarantee. And that's a, a fiscal impact on school districts. The one year delay that's in the bill right now allows a one year adjustment to anticipate the loss of that state revenue because the certified rate came down. So it's not that the board made a decision to bring down a rate, it's the, the way the system works and that causes a loss of state revenue. So that one year allows us to adjust budgets and accommodate that adjustment. Uh, so just wanted to clarify that. And, uh, that is a concern, uh, that we would lose the ability to qualify for state funds due to something outside of our control.

35. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:31:22

    Okay. Thank you. I I do have a question. Um, as it relates to, uh, in your case, a school board, if they know they're gonna be capped at 5% annually, do you think it's more or less likely that they would raise taxes more frequently than what they currently do for fear of not being able to keep up with inflation, whereas they often kind of kick the can down the road until it kind of gets so painful that they have to, you know, cry tax increase?

36. Todd Hauber, Granite School District1:31:57

    Sure. And it's a fair question. What, what would motivate us to, to go through the process, uh, that we, as I still understand this, we would be subject to truth and taxation even below the 5% correct. So, so we already have that, uh, conversation to go through and the challenges that come with that, I don't know that I would say I would automatically start to raise taxes because I could go to the 5%. If I'm gonna do it, I might as well max it. I, I don't know that that's our mentality. Uh, I do know that at least for the Granite School District, we are in an annual conversation with the public because of a, a capital strategy we have for our deferred maintenance. If that piece of money is gonna be held against the 5%, I'm, I'm already challenged to juggle and I may have to come on a regular basis to accommodate both my capital need and any operational budget conversations. And, and the cap might push me into that conversation more often than if I could do it when the dollars are needed at the particular year.

37. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:33:00

    Thank you. Uh, okay. Our final witness, uh, mayor Walker, please, uh, we know who you are, but please still introduce us and who you represent, et cetera.

38. Troy Walker, Mayor, Draper City1:33:09

    Thank you. Um, mayor Troy Walker from Draper City. I'm also here on behalf of the League of Cities and Towns. I'm the past president of the league, so I'm a league officer. First of all, I want to thank Representative Christofferson. He's been a friend to local government over the years, and so I've always appreciated his willingness to look out for local government. I think he's been a really good leader in that regard. I disagree with him on this bill. Um, as you know, um, we have a representative form of government and it is the greatest form in all the world. And my constituents sent me to City Hall. I'm in my 18th year of elected service. And it was good to have one of my constituents, uh, testify. Um, in my 18 years as a mayor and a council member, we've had two property tax increases, only two. We have been judicious about our budget. And our goal has always been to try and balance our sales tax revenue and our costs. And it's something I do every single year. My statutory job is to propose a budget to my council. My counsel approves that budget, then we take it to the voters. The two truth and taxation hearings that we had were interesting. Um, the first one we had, I don't know, 25 or 30 people, and most of them were there because the tax notice is about as easy to read as the Old Testament. And so most of them walk in the room thinking, why are you doing this, mayor, our houses have gone up over the years. Why have, why are you? And I always say to them, if, if I got the increase, you'd never hear from me. 'cause as your house went up, I would be able to continue to operate. That's not how it works. So we spent the good hour explaining the tax notice. My property tax mayor Troy Walker's property tax last year, $641. That's what I paid Draper City. 60% of my budget comes from sales tax revenue. 'cause we've bounced out my $641. I get a paramedic in four minutes. When I have my coronary hope I don't, I get a police officer if I need one in four minutes, I get parks wreck. I get all the things my constituents want. Most importantly though is public safety. A good paramedic is expensive. A a good police officer is very expensive. Fire trucks alone, I, I know you have all heard this before, they've gone from a, you know, a base price of around a million depending on the truck to nearly 2 million. Not my fault, but I tell you this, my constituents expect they're gonna have the public safety at the level they want it. And that costs money. I think it's appropriate to let their representatives, me and council members stand in front of them, put the budget in front of 'em, they can make comments. We took comments and we adjusted based upon the truth and taxation comments. The safety valve in the Republic is the referendum. And let me tell you folks, it works. Um, I can ask the Mayor Bluffdale twice. She had a referendum, and consequently they do not have a full fire department like other cities. Um, it's happened in Orem, it's happened in Harriman. I've had it happen to me in a special service district. Um, I think the system is good. It's government's messy. It's not easy. I get, I get the con I like the concept. I don't like paying taxes anymore than anybody else, but I sure do. Like my representatives being the ones who can say to me, people, this is what it costs for our police force. This is what it costs for our fire department. This is what we need. And that's what we did with our, with our truth and taxation. We laid it out. Now, I think the, I think the, uh, tax notice needs to get less Old Testament, maybe more, uh, evangelical. I don't know. I think we could work on that, but I do think the way our government's set up is the way it was supposed to be set up. You send me to office, I do my job, you get mad at me, you can vote me out. Um, or you can argue with me about the budget and I'll listen. Or you can do a referendum, but at least everyone's gonna know where everyone is. Um, and so that's our view. And as a league, you know, our goal as cities is just to do the work that we do. I think most of us do a good job running our places. We're not out there taking crazy world trips and spending money on weird stuff. We're just buying cops, firefighters, and trucks and trying to keep the potholes filled. And we don't even do that that well. But we, we are doing our job. And, and, and we're the ones that you expect to do it. If any of you need a paramedic, it's gonna come from Salt Lake City. If you need a police officer up here, you'll get the Highway patrol. But if you get out of way from here, that public safety officer's gonna be a city person or a sheriff. And so we're just trying to do our job and do it well. And I think we do, and I appreciate the, the insight and on the property tax, but I think our system is excellent. And I think it, it works. It's not, it's messy, but it works. Thank you. Thank you.

39. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:37:54

    Uh, mayor, we do have, I think a question for you from Representative Provo.

40. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:37:59

    Thanks for being here, mayor, mayor, and sharing your thoughts on that. Um, I wondered if you could, um, I've got two questions, if that's okay. First one, um, there was a comment about bond rating and, um, whether or not that should be a consideration. Could you explain to us what would be the impact on your budget if you, if your city's bond rate had changed?

41. Troy Walker, Mayor, Draper City1:38:21

    Well, um, the last property tax increase that we did was about 9%. It was 100% for public safety. And that's what we, what we did with it. Um, bond rating wise, we don't have that many bonds out. So, but when you go to bond, what the bond holders expect is a, a consistent stream of revenue, that is what gets the rating. You can't go into standard and Poors and say, we're gonna, we're gonna bond for this building, but our, our tax rate's, this, we know we're gonna collect this, but, you know, if we have this problem, we might not. They're, they're gonna lower the rating. It's just how it works. I mean, it's the cost of money and

42. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:38:57

    Subsequently your cost of doing business goes up,

43. Troy Walker, Mayor, Draper City1:38:59

    Right. Which we, you know, which we pass on. Like everything else that gets passed on, you know, and as you look at cities and how they operate, um, I think it's just important to remember we are the ones that provide all the quality of life, right? Like, it's, it's your neighborhood, it's you. You can call me and say, mayor, I need that pothole fixed. And I can say to you, it's a little too cold, but we'll get on it. Um, or or you can say, mayor, why do we spend this much on this? And I can explain it and we can have a discussion. And I think that's fair. I think if you, if you leave the tax increasing to just pure democracy, I think that gets messier than we really even understand. Because most people, they expect Troy Walker to go to City Hall, pay attention, use his brain and his skillset, and they can go to the hockey game. And they don't have to think all night about my budget. I, my budget's clear and transparent, but I think people expect us to do our jobs. We wanna do our jobs, we want be able to know we can consistently do it. I wanna say in FI final, I think our property tax system is amazing because we really do by guaranteeing, um, year over year the same amount, we're able to effectively budget. That's a fantastic system. It's not like that nationwide. We're one of the few states. It's a really good system. Now. Taxes suck, but it's still a good system. It's the, I used to tell people the jury system, I'm a, I'm a trial lawyer is the worst in the world except everywhere else, right? Um, and that's how I feel about our system. It might be the worst tax system in the world, but it's better than everywhere else. Um, so anyway, sorry,

44. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:40:32

    May I ask one more?

45. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:40:34

    Just one More briefly. Thank you.

46. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:40:37

    Um, something that I think needs to, to maybe be explored briefly is the fact that at the state level, we do pass on a lot of work to our cities, sometimes via unfunded mandates. And I have concern about this double standard where, you know, we, we set STA expectations and statute expect the cities to be partners in things, but we don't necessarily fund things. And I, I worry that we're creating a double standard there by, if, if we were to limit the amount, your ability to go through truth and taxation, which itself has its own chilling effect. I mean, that prevents a lot of cities from, and districts and, and whatnot from even raising taxes. And I think that's a pretty good check on, on limiting the degree to which those tax, um, increases are implemented. And this is not me saying that for the record, that everything's fine and dandy and property tax, we're all feeling the burn on that. There's, there's no question it needs to be ara uh, addressed. But, um, I I just wanna say that, you know, what are your thoughts on us as a legislature compounding the problem and, you know, exacerbating that by nature of those decisions?

47. Troy Walker, Mayor, Draper City1:41:46

    Well, I don't like it. Um, I, I wish you wouldn't. I, I hope you don't. Um, you know, you guys know this sales tax is flat. Um, despite what everyone says, this economy is not as good as my sales tax numbers tell me. And I only look at that 'cause they used to call that when I was in college, a leading economic indicator that when sales tax started to flatten, that didn't mean things were good. And so for me, I've lived off my growth all these years because we collect a little more than we, we've been able to spend. I have just 300 total employees in Draper City. Um, but when sales tax starts to drop, that's when we go, okay, we gotta pay these public service costs. I mean, that's where we're at. I mean, I'd really rather get it outta sales tax, but

48. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:42:28

    Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Uh, thank you. See no other questions, uh, from the committee. Thank you. We will close public comment and bring it back to the committee, uh, for further discussion or action. Representative Shepherd,

49. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:42:55

    I'd like to move to hold this bill and committee.

50. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:42:57

    Okay. Would you like to speak to that?

51. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:42:59

    Yes, I would. I think where he is headed, it is a, a a really good place. And I know that his intent is very perfect, actually. His intent is perfect. Um, however, I know there's some other bills that we're gonna be looking at that are similar to this. Um, they've been working with some, some other entities as well. And I'd like to take a look at that one. And then if we need to revisit this one, and maybe that gives them some time to go and, and, and look maybe at the bond rating and at some of those others, uh, by the way, the school boards have the fiscal year as well, so just wanted to give that update. Uh, so that's where I'm at with it.

52. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:43:38

    Okay. Uh, thank you. Uh, motion is to hold, uh, to the committee for discussion. See no further lights to the sponsor of the bill.

53. Rep. Kay J. Christofferson1:43:49

    Well, I, I mean, I'd be glad to do whatever the committee, uh, feels is best. I just would like to say though, that I think we're making a bigger deal outta the bond rating than it is. I mean, bonds, when, when entities need more money, they go to bonds and they always go to vote of the people. Uh, and if, if, uh, you know, if they're worried about the bond ratings going down, I don't think that's a, a big concern because you're, you're not reducing the revenue coming in. It's still growing. It, it's, it, it's growing with, with the natural growth plus up to 5% without going to the other people. So I don't think that's, I think that's making a bigger deal than it is. Uh, but you know, all these things that the cities provide or counties or school districts they provide, it's kind of like they're, they're looking at what the majority of the people want, they're providing a lot of services. But on the other side, there's, there's a few people that are just saying, I am losing my home. I cannot pay taxes on this home anymore. I'm on fixed income. And I've heard of some people having to move or leave because they can't pay the taxes on their home. So I just want to balance all that and, and, you know, maybe this bill needs to be tweaked or adjusted. Maybe there's other bills that are better, but I think that, uh, we need to address it somehow. And I think this is one way that can be done.

54. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:45:28

    Okay. Uh, thank you. Uh, I will place the, uh, motion to hold the bill. All in favor? Say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay. Uh, will the, uh, eyes to hold the bill, please Raise their hand. Okay. And will the nose please raise their hand? Okay. The motion to hold passes. Seven to three. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. Uh, Representative Shepherd. Oh, no. Representative Kyle. Okay. We're gonna give you the honor,

55. Rep. Jason B. Kyle1:46:14

    Uh, move that we adjourn.

56. Rep. Steve Eliason (chair)1:46:16

    Uh, motion to adjourn. All in favor of adjourning, say aye. Aye. We stand adjourned.