Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Utah families will not see an increase in personal income taxes next year as lawmakers voted down a bill proposing to use the tax to obtain new money for education.
The House Education Committee on Monday rejected HB54 in a 2-11 vote after nearly two hours of debate and questions among lawmakers, educators and policy advocates on both sides of the issue.
"I am disappointed, but I probably anticipated this," said bill sponsor Jack Draxler, R-North Logan. "I think this is a discussion that needs to go on."
Draxler's original bill proposed raising the personal income tax from 5 percent to 6 percent, splitting revenue evenly between performance-based salary raises for teachers and classroom technology programs.
But a substitute bill cut the proposed tax hike in half and added a provision that would give across-the-board raises for teachers in addition to the performance pay and technology programs.
The substitute bill would have cost an extra $288 per year in income taxes for a median income family of four. In its first full year of implementation, the additional 0.5 percent in income tax would have generated an estimated $429.7 million in state revenue.
Draxler said salary raises for teachers are long overdue in Utah, where the average starting wage for a teacher is $33,000 per year. Because of this, many education students in the state take teaching jobs in places elsewhere such as Wyoming, where a teacher's starting wage could be between $10,000 and $20,000 more.
Other lawmakers said that while they weren't in favor raising the income tax, they agreed with Draxler's emphasis on the need for more competitive wages for educators.
"We have a sad problem where teachers are incentivized to leave the classroom and become administrators just to make more money," said Rep. LaVar Christensen, R-Draper, who voted against the bill. "Raising taxes, as tempting as it is, doesn't bring in the results that we want."
Rep. Steve Eliason, R-Sandy, who also voted against the bill, asked whether making the proposal a referendum and putting it to a public vote would be a good alternative.
Last month, Utah voters had conflicting opinions of the bill. A UtahPolicy.com poll showed that 54 percent of voters were against a 1 percent increase in the income tax. But a later poll by Utah State University and the Exoro Group showed 59 percent of voters were in favor of the measure if the revenue stayed in the classroom.
Draxler said he would consider supporting a referendum as long as the policy was framed correctly to voters, emphasizing that all funds from such an increase would go directly toward funding improvements in the classroom and not administration.
"I think as policymakers and as representatives of the people, we should grab the bull by the horns by ourselves without having to go to a public referendum," he said.
Eliason also asked why a tax increase is necessary when the state is expected to have surplus funds available for education. Draxler said surplus funds should be spent in education, but most of those funds are one-time allocations that may or may not be available in the future, making it unknown whether they could permanently sustain the programs in HB54.
"We need to increase funding in a reliable and sustainable way, and the right way to do that is with a very modest increase in the income tax," Draxler said. "If we borrow from other funds — from the general fund, from the transportation fund, from one-time money — we're not addressing the issue long term."
Even though his bill won't move forward, Draxler said he plans to continue to "stir the pot" in finding ways to improve funding for classrooms.
"We're only beginning the appropriations process," he said. "I'm going to weigh in very aggressively with my colleagues with addressing the issues that my bill would have addressed, and that is teacher pay and technology."
