Estimated read time: 4-5 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 Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information.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 — After Utah voters in several counties shot down last year's Proposition 1, a tax increase to fund local road projects, lawmakers are now pursuing ways to make the tax hike a little more palatable.
Like Proposition 1, HB215, sponsored by Rep. Brian Greene, R-Pleasant Grove, would allow counties to raise taxes by one penny for every $4 spent upon voter approval. However, it would also allow city leaders to keep the money that would otherwise go directly to transit districts, including the at-times controversial Utah Transit Authority.
Another bill, HB183, would give local leaders in certain rural counties the ability to flex how much of the tax revenue goes to transit districts.
Representatives from the Utah League of Cities and Towns and Utah Association of Counties support HB183, which passed a House committee Thursday with no opposition. Greene's bill, however, is finding little traction.
City control
When Proposition 1 failed in the state's two largest counties, Salt Lake and Utah counties, critics indicated that UTA's struggling public image could have been a factor.
Greene said his bill's purpose isn't necessarily to strip potential funding from UTA, but to give local governments the power to choose how the tax revenue is spent.
"This isn't a UTA issue for me. It's what our most critical needs are, and transit isn't always the answer," he said. "In my district, in Utah County, (local) roads are at the most critical need. Transit or anything else is a distant second."
In Proposition 1's original form, 40 percent of the tax revenue went to cities, 20 percent to counties and 40 percent to transit districts.
Under Greene's bill, 20 percent would go to counties and 80 percent would go to cities. It would then be up to city officials to decide how much to spend on transit.
Abby Albrecht, director of the Utah Transportation Coalition, said HB215 would nullify last year's "grand compromise" — HB362, which required transportation taxes to be split among cities, counties and transit.
"We believe a multimodal transportation system is the best way to continue to evolve our transportation needs, especially in the Wasatch Front," she said.
Cameron Diehl, of the Utah League of Cities and Towns, said his organization also stands by HB362.
"That commitment was a result of months of negotiation and deliberation," he said. "It would be disingenuous for us to go back on that a year later."
But how else will voters become more receptive to a local tax increase for transportation projects, if adjusting UTA's share isn't the answer?
"That's the million dollar question," Diehl said. "UTA obviously needs to improve their quality of service and their reputation with the public. And cities and counties need to make a stronger argument about why this is a necessary investment."
The bill is still waiting to be heard by the House Revenue and Taxation Committee.
Rural county control
Some smaller counties refrained from placing Proposition 1 on November's ballot because 40 percent seemed too big of a share in areas that have smaller transit districts, said HB183's sponsor, Rep. Jack Draxler, R-North Logan.
His bill would only affect five counties: Iron, Summit, Cache, Uintah and Duchesne.
"We want to recognize transit districts, but we also want to have a little bit of extra flexibility for these smaller counties to address that portion of sales tax revenue if the citizens pass it," Draxler said.
County officials would be allowed to decide how much of the tax revenue would go to transit districts, with a minimum of 10 percent and a maximum of 40 percent.
That could mean a shift of up to $6 million from local transit budgets in those counties, according to the bill.
Logan Mayor Craig Petersen said there is strong support for the bill in Cache County.
If it passes, Cache County officials will be more willing to place the tax increase on the ballot, he said.
"It's not that our transit district doesn't need additional funding," Petersen said. "It's just that as we compare the need of the county for road improvements versus the transit district, we believe that the needs of the county roads are more critical." Email: kmckellar@deseretnews.com Twitter: KatieMcKellar1
