Jail Funding Bill is Numbered, has Language
Written on February 3, 2012 at 6:36 pm, by uacnet
UAC’s jail funding bill is out. SB 171 would dedicate a portion of the beer tax to fund condition of probation prisoners. Right now estimates suggest about $8 million would flow from the beer tax to jail reimbursement. This still wouldn’t make counties whole regarding jail reimbursement, but it would certainly help.
It’s a good bill, we’ve got a good sponsor, and it will help the counties. It does not raise the current beer tax, instead it appropriates some of those revenues towards a program that has been underfunded by the state for years. Now we need to get it passed.
UAC’s Position on SB 18
Written on February 2, 2012 at 10:23 pm, by uacnet
Earlier today, UAC changed it’s position on SB 18. Where we had previously supported SB 18, UAC took a position to oppose SB 18 as it is currently amended. Let me try to explain our position as it now stands.
On Tuesday, SB 18 was before the House Government Operations Standing Committee. The bill, which would make email addresses a private record in regards to voter registration forms, had already passed the Senate and was well on it’s way to passing the House when it was amended over the objections of the bill’s sponsor in committee. The amendment added an additional piece of information private on the voter registration form: the voter’s birth date.
On it’s face, UAC has no problem with making the birth date on the voter registration form private. In fact, we’ve taken a position to support such legislation in the past. The problem is that legislation aiming to do that in year’s past has repeatedly been defeated thanks to objections from the political parties and others.
By amending SB 18, the committee made the passage of the bill much less likely. The amendment was also unnecessary, HB 304 does everything the amendment to SB 18 sets out to do. The special interests who orchestrated the amendment saw the highjacking of SB 18 as a potentially easier way to get the legislation through. UAC sees it as a sure fire way to kill the bill. Hence our position.
We’ll now see if we can save the thing. SB 18 was circled on the House 3rd Reading Calendar this morning.
It’s Groundhog Day
Written on February 2, 2012 at 10:03 pm, by uacnet
In honor of Groundhog Day (the movie, not the holiday), I’m reposting a blog entry I wrote back in 2007.
So this being Groundhog Day and all, I couldn’t help but reflect on the classic Harold Ramis/Bill Murray film of the same name. Even if you’ve never seen the movie, you’ve heard the premise: Phil Connors is destined to live the same day over and over again until he gets it right. In the end, Phil stops being a selfish jerk and realizes that it is far better to give than to receive. And finally, he gets to move on with the rest of his life.
It occurs to me that the Legislative process is much like the movie Groundhog Day. Year after year, the same tired issues are debated until finally the Legislature gets it right and can move on with life. So my question is: when will the Legislature realize that it is far better to give than to receive and fully fund jail reimbursement so we can all move on with our lives?
Report on February 2nd UAC Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on February 2, 2012 at 6:37 pm, by uacnet
UAC considered a number of bills today at it’s second Legislative Committee meeting of the year. Below is a report on the action of the committee:
UAC took a position to support the following bills:
UAC took a position to oppose the following bills:
UAC also revised its position on SB 18 – Government Records Access and Management Act – Voter Registration Records from support to oppose as currently amended.
Agenda for February 2 UAC Legislative Committee Meeting Now Online
Written on January 31, 2012 at 8:55 pm, by uacnet
The agenda and additional materials for the Feburary 2 UAC Legislative Committee Meeting are now available to review. Find all the information here.
County Officials Should Look at HB 94
Written on January 27, 2012 at 9:29 pm, by uacnet
County officials should take a long look at HB 94. It’s a bill that would require state or local government to conduct a study, contact private enterprise, and receive an advisory opinion from the state’s privatization policy board prior to engaging in any potential commercial activity. It seems probable that there will be at least some fiscal impact to county government if this bill passes. I suspect that most counties are conducting some sort of study prior to entering into any commercial activity, but those studies may not cover the requirements spelled out in HB 94. Additionally, the requirements of this bill regarding contacting private enterprise and meeting with the privatization policy board are certainly new mandates.
Obviously, government should tread lightly when offering services that the free market provides. Whether HB 94 would be an effective tool in weighing the pros and cons of government services is still to be determined. Look for this issue on UAC’s next Legislative Committee meeting.
HB 19 Could Be Costly
Written on January 27, 2012 at 9:07 pm, by uacnet
HB 19 is a bill that could cost Utah’s counties a lot of money. The bill would prohibit state and local government from using social security numbers as personal identifiers. Additionally, the bill would prohibit any nine digit identifier whether a social security number or not. The sponsor’s intent seems to be one of personal privacy.
I’ve heard from county recorders, treasurers, and sheriffs that counties are using nine digit identifiers—both social security numbers and other identifiers—and to comply with this bill would cost a great deal of money and require a huge effort.
The bill, which still hasn’t had a committee hearing, has a $10 million fiscal note due to similar concerns within state agencies. Given that fiscal note, perhaps the bill never will receive a hearing.
Report on First UAC Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on January 26, 2012 at 6:17 pm, by uacnet
At the first UAC Legislative Committee meeting, UAC members acted on a number of bills.
UAC voted to support the following bills:
UAC voted to oppose the following bill:
Voter Rolls and Personal Property Taxes Highlight the Session’s First Day
Written on January 24, 2012 at 11:50 pm, by uacnet
On the first day of the Legislative Session several bills of county interest were presented to legislative committees. I’d like to write about a couple of them.
Discussion on HB 253 got quite heated. The Deseret News covered the discussion here. County clerks as well as county attorneys likely need to look closely at this bill. It would create a mechanism to clean up voter rolls by sending a notification from the clerk’s office to any voter who has not participated in two consecutive General Elections asking the registered voter to respond to the notification of have his or her name taken off the election roll after another two General Elections. There is some concern that the bill could run afoul of the National Voting Rights Act.
The sponsor’s goal is to improve the percentage of Utah voters participating in an election by lowering the denominator when calculating the turnout. I appreciate his objective. Obviously, county clerks work hard to ensure that their voting rolls are current and up to date. At the same time, as election officers, they are interested in ensuring that barriers to participating in the democratic process. HB 253 is on our Thursday agenda.
HB 41 would raise the current $3,800 exemption for personal property tax to $25,000. The sponsor’s stated goal in doing this is to eliminate time consuming personal property audits to small business-this despite the fact that testimony has been given multiple times that the increased exemption would have no effect on personal property audits. If the bill passes, it would result in a $12 million tax shift from Utah’s businesses to Utah’s home owners.
The bill was held in committee so that some confusing language could be addressed. UAC currently doesn’t have a position on this bill but will be considering it at our Legislative Committee meeting Thursday.
Agenda for January 26 UAC Legislative Committee Meeting Now Online
Written on January 24, 2012 at 8:26 pm, by uacnet
The agenda and other materials for the first UAC Legislative Committee meeting is now available. Find it here.
The 2012 Legislative Session is Up and Running
Written on January 23, 2012 at 11:05 pm, by uacnet
The Legislative Session is up and running. Once again UAC is at the Capitol ready to represent counties’ interests. If you as a county official need any member of UAC staff to discuss any issue please contact us. Our cell phone numbers are as followed: Brent (801) 541-8719, Mark (801) 783-7643, Adam (801) 755-5157, and Arie (801) 209-7786.
Remember, we welcome all of your input and we’d love to answer any of your questions. The Legislative process can be confusing, UAC staff has over 50 years experience dealing with it and there aren’t many things that collectively we haven’t seen.
Please return often to this website during the session. There are three sections of the site that should prove helpful for you as you follow the action on the Hill: first, I’ll try to cover a lot of topics of county interest on this blog; second, the Legislative Issues section of the site includes UAC’s online tracking sheet as well as our current position statements; and finally, the UAC Calendar will be updated every Tuesday afternoon with the agenda and meeting materials for UAC’s Thursday Legislative Committee meetings.
October Interim Recap
Written on October 20, 2011 at 10:54 pm, by uacnet
Believe it or not, the 2012 Legislative Session will soon be upon us. With the completion of yesterday’s Interim Day meetings, the Legislature’s interim committees have only one more meeting before the general session. That being the case, the Legislature took action on some of the issues they’ve discussed throughout this interim.
The Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Interim Committee adopted a number of election law bills as committee bills Wednesday. These bills include: 1) a bill allowing the Lt. Governor’s Office to offer a more extensive voter information website specific to the precinct of the voter in lieu of the current voter information pamphlet that is mailed out to the electorate, 2) a bill that would protect email addresses provided as part of voter registration as a private record, and 3) a bill that would clarify the conditions under which a political party may replace a candidate.
The most controversial issue that came out of the committee as a committee bill regarded a bill that would lay in place a process for removing names off of the registration roll. The Salt Lake Tribune covered that issue here.
With these election bills being clarified as committee bills, they’ll have a head start going into the Legislative Session. During the first weeks of the Legislative Session when the gears of government move slowly, committee bills are often the only bills that seem to move through the process, with a deluge of bills following them as the session moves on.
The Revenue and Taxation Interim Committee considered an issue dealing with the taxation of travel-related service resellers. These include such companies as Priceline, Travelocity, and Hotwire. The taxation issue regarding this industry revolves around the sales tax and transient room tax (TRT) of hotel rooms. When a traveler rents a room through one of these companies, the sales taxes paid don’t reflect the full cost to the consumer, but the agreed upon cost of the room between the hotel and the travel-related service reseller. Even so, the resellers will often charge the consumer the equivalent of the sales taxes for the price the traveler is paying and simply pocket the difference, calling this a service fee. The question before the committee was what, if anything, should be done about this.
During the 2011 General Session legislation was introduced that would have required the industry to remit the TRT and sales tax to the state and local government for the price paid by the consumer. SB 296 failed to pass when it was left circled on the Senate 3rd Reading Calendar. Yesterday, the committee took nearly a complete opposite approach when it directed staff to draft legislation permitting the industry to continue its current practice albeit with more disclosure to the consumer.
This is not an insignificant issue as SB 296 was expected to increase TRT revenues statewide roughly $1.2 million.
September Interim Recap
Written on September 22, 2011 at 3:59 pm, by uacnet
Over the past couple of years, we’ve seen a number of services that have traditionally been considered county services be co-opted by municipalities. After the cities have begun offering these services, there have been complaints of double taxation. At yesterday’s interim day at the Legislature, UAC’s President and Executive Director–Larry Ellertson and Brent Gardner–spoke to the Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Interim Committee on that subject.
Countywide services are often more efficient than municipal services. Conversely there are services best served by the city, state, or federal government (can you imagine a system where each county in the United States supplied its own army?). Considering economies of scale, there are efficiencies through consolidation within a county. Yet, over the past few years counties have lost services such as HAZMAT, bomb squads, and others to municipalities over the past few years.
Brent and Larry proposed to the committee yesterday that the Legislature look at what services should remain administered at the county level. Rather than an attempt to retroactively prohibit municipalities from administering services that they’ve already co-opted that have historically been administered by the county, Brent and Larry recommended a codifying a list of services currently administered at the county level to remain countywide services.
The committee recommended the Utah Association of Counties collaborate with the League of Cities and Towns and return in October with a list of such services. This blog will keep you posted on any progress.
Elsewhere at interim day, the Revenue and Taxation Interim Committee heard a proposal to raise the current $3,800 exemption for personal property tax in an effort to eliminate the personal property tax audit process for more small businesses. It became clear early in the presentation that the proposal wouldn’t address the stated goal of changing the audit process.
The Personal property tax audit process encompasses all business including those that fall below the $3,800 exemption. Moving the exemption up would do nothing to save small businesses the burden of complying with a random audit.
July Interim Day Recap
Written on July 21, 2011 at 8:56 pm, by uacnet
The Legislature met yesterday for both an interim day and a special session. A couple of issues of county interest were discussed in the legislative interim committees.
Jail Reimbursement and Contracting
The Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Interim Committee discussed jail reimbursement and contracting. The purpose of the discussion was to provide a quick overview of these two programs that cause so much heartache to county government. The idea of dedicating a portion of the beer tax to fund
the programs was discussed (as recorded in the Salt Lake Tribune), but the most interesting discussion centered on jail contracting.
Representative Noel, who has long been a champion for the counties on this issue, identified three benefits for keeping a jail contracting program in place. They included: 1) providing an option to move state prisoners around to discourage prison gangs from forming; 2) keeping the State’s bonding rate at
triple-A by expanding bed space while not requiring the state to build an expensive, new facility; and 3) providing jobs and economic development to rural Utah. He urged the committee to honor their commitments when they enter into contracts with the counties.
These comments triggered a rebuttal from Senate President Waddoups who stressed that there is no commitment from the state to fill county jails with contract prisoners even in the case of a memorandum of understand. (If county officials are interested in listening to Waddoups’ exact words, listen to
the audio of the July 20, 2011 meeting. Waddoups’ comments begin at the 1 hour 5 minute mark, although his most interesting comments come at 1 hour 10 minutes.)
My take away point from the discussion is this: counties should look carefully before contracting with the state to expand their jails for more state contract inmates.
Preferential Voting
The Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Interim Committee heard testimony concerning a concept that would allow voters at the polls to vote for their first and second choice. The theoretical advantage to this method would be in a race with more than two candidates, a vote for a third-party
candidate wouldn’t necessarily cost a more viable candidate a race.
The disadvantage to such a system would be a greatly expanded ballot where the choice wouldn’t be for just one of a number of candidates, but every possible combination of first and second choices of the candidates. I doubt we’ll hear anything further concerning this idea.
June Interim Day Recap
Written on June 17, 2011 at 5:07 pm, by uacnet
The Legislature met this Wednesday for another interim day full of committee meetings. Here is a review of some the items discussed that deal with county government.
The Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Interim Committee considered some election law fixes including a proposal to clarify the manner in which initiative petition packets need to be presented to the county. Recently, several organizations behind initiative drives have failed to follow the code in regards to these packets. Current law requires the signature pages be stapled to additional background pages explaining the intent of the initiative. These packets are required to be stapled during the signature drive so as to guarantee that anyone signing the initiative knows what they are signing. The committee was asked for feedback from frustrated election officers who have had to deal with these packets and have no choice under current law but to disqualify signatures collected with unstapled packets.
The Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Interim Committee also considered a draft legislation that would require political subdivisions (including county government) to account for federal receipts and make plans in the event that federal funds are reduced. This idea was not well received by the political subdivisions that spoke to the legislation Wednesday as the consensus was that the requirements of the bill would result in additional costs for uncertainties that would be hard to anticipate.
The Revenue and Taxation Interim Committee briefly discussed whether or not to consider a beer tax increase of five cents dedicated to jail reimbursement at a later meeting. The beer tax has been considered a potential payment source for jail reimbursement after legislative leadership directed the Utah Association of Counties to find a dedicated revenue source to address yearly shortfalls. Unfortunately, the committee voted not to consider the issue based on a strange coalition of Legislators on the far right who, as a matter of principle, refuse to consider any tax increases and the beer-drinking delegation of the Legislature.
Finally, the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim Committee discussed a proposal from several counties requesting the Legislatures support of the designation of wilderness in those counties. Several years ago, Washington County backed federal legislation that designated wilderness area within its county. The thinking was that it was better that the county get in front of any wilderness designation than having something unfavorable shoved down its throat. Representatives from Emery, Piute, and San Juan counties presented to the committee their wilderness plans seeking the committee’s support. Unfortunately, the presentation was at the end of the day and by the time the committee was prepared to take action, it had lost a quorum.
Another Legislative Session Comes to a Close
Written on March 10, 2011 at 10:13 pm, by fluidadmin
The 2011 Legislative Session is over! Overall, county government came out ok. We certainly didn’t get everything we wanted, but we didn’t loss any huge issues and appropriations came out rosier than it has in several years.
Join us on Wednesday, March 23 for our Legislative Recap meeting where we’ll review our ups and downs of the session. The meeting will be held in the Olmstead Room of the Senate Building starting at 10:00 AM.
A Modest Proposal
Written on March 10, 2011 at 10:13 pm, by fluidadmin
Now that most of the bills on UAC’s tracking sheet have already passed or failed, I turn my attention to a bill that UAC never took a position on, but that was featured heavily in the press. HB 210 would allow an individual to shoot a feral cat in the unincorporated county. The bill has evoked strong emotions from animal lovers who can’t stomach the thought of harming a cat, feral or not.
At the same time, HB 177 quietly passed through the legislature today. HB 177 creates an account for canine body armor and provides an income tax contribution for that account. The goal of HB 177 is to provide a mechanism to gather the funds necessary to provide body armor to more of the police dogs in the line of duty.
Here’s my proposal to possible amend HB 210 in a manner that would make it more palatable to the Utah public. Why not merge HB 177 with HB 210 and clarify that the only feral cats that citizens are allowed to shoot are those wearing body armor? It would certainly better even the playing field.
…On second thought, maybe I’d better just stick to bills of county interest.
Where We Stand on Appropriations
Written on March 10, 2011 at 10:13 pm, by fluidadmin
With the fate of only a handful of bills on UAC’s tracking sheet still to be determined, let’s consider appropriations, shall we?
At the beginning of the session, the legislature set a base budget that cut seven percent across the board. That translated in heavy cuts to state programs administered by county government (in some instances disproportionately so). Fortunately, with positive revenue estimates reported in the last few weeks, most of those cuts have been backfilled. Adam tells me that most of the counties’ health and human services programs have been made full under the latest budget.
Even better news surrounds the issue of jail reimbursement. This year, Representative Brad Dee was able to procure $10 million of ongoing funds to pay towards jail reimbursement and jail contracting. Of the $10 million, $5 million will go towards jail reimbursement and $5 million will go towards jail contracting. While it doesn’t solve the problem (the state would have had to dedicate the entire $10 million to make jail reimbursement whole), it certainly helps.
After years of diminishing appropriations to county government (and, in fairness to the Legislature, diminishing state revenues), this year’s appropriations are a nice change.
SB 231 Might Get a Sequel
Written on March 8, 2011 at 10:12 pm, by fluidadmin
Jason, Freddy, and Chucky have nothing on SB 231. The bill that would circumvent local planning and zoning in the name of Hollywood refuses to die. Currently held in the Senate Rules Committee, proponents of the bill are looking at an amendment to exempt cities from the bill. That would mean that a film enterprise zone (as spelled out in the bill) could only be located within the unincorporated county. Coincidently, the land in Summit County where backers of the bill want to build their movie studio is located in the unincorporated county.
Amendment or not, this bill is still a box office bomb. The League of Cities and Towns is still opposed to the bill regardless of any changes, but it would be a good idea to reiterate your opposition by contacting your Senators in the next few days. You can find UAC’s bullet sheet on the bill here.
Just Like the Villian from a Horror Movie, SB 231 is Back from the Dead
Written on March 3, 2011 at 10:06 pm, by fluidadmin
Sometimes I feel like such a dummy. Just yesterday I wrote about the end SB 231. Well guess what? It’s back. Today the Senate, under suspension of the rules, placed it at the top of the second reading calendar. This bill is extremely offensive and it has to die. Please help us to do just that.
Report on Sixth (and Last) UAC Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on March 3, 2011 at 10:05 pm, by fluidadmin
UAC took the following action at its last Legislative Committee meeting of the year this morning:
UAC supports the following bills:
UAC opposes the following bills:
UAC elected to remain neutral on the following bill:
UAC changed its position from opposition to neutral on the following bill:
End of Committee Meetings Means the End of These Bills
Written on March 3, 2011 at 10:05 pm, by fluidadmin
Today wraps up standing committee hearings for the 2011 Legislative Session. This is good for a couple of reasons: First, it signals that we’re into the stretch run of the legislative session (after today we’ve only got six working days left of the session). Second, with the end of committee hearings we also see the end of a number of bills. Legislative rules require that each bill receive at least one committee hearing if it is to be voted on by either body. These rules are suspended for a handful of bills every year, but those bills usually deal with something very important (like the budget).
After the agendas for today’s committee meetings were posted, I was able to check off a dozen bills on our tracking sheet that won’t be going anywhere in 2011. Most of these were bills that we wanted nothing to do with and none of them were bills we had to pass.
Here’s a list of the bills on our tracking sheet that effectively died today due to their failure to be heard in a committee:
*I’m assuming SB 231 should be on this list since the public hearing it received shouldn’t technically have happened. (To be honest, though, I have no idea how the Legislature would deal with this bill. Fortunately, I don’t think it’s going anywhere.)
SB 231 Appears Dead
Written on March 2, 2011 at 10:04 pm, by fluidadmin
SB 231, a bill circumventing local planning and zoning that I wrote about here, does not appear to be going anywhere this year. It was scheduled to be heard in committee last night, but the sponsor failed to show up (perhaps because he received word from his caucus that the bill had no chance of passing the Senate).
Committee hearings end today so there will be no opportunity for SB 231 to receive a favorable vote from any other committee. Clearly, the sponsor didn’t see his bill passing out of the Senate Government Opts and Political Subdivisions Standing Committee and made the cowardly decision not to try. What I found most strange about the sponsor’s failure to present his bill last night was that he neglected to inform the committee or even proponents of his legislation that he wouldn’t be present. The meeting stretched to 6:00 PM and the room was packed with people there for this debate. I imagine those there to support the bill must have felt a little betrayed. Talk about a strange way to win friends and influence people.
March 3 Legislative Committee Meeting Agenda Online
Written on March 1, 2011 at 10:04 pm, by fluidadmin
The agenda and other materials for Thursday’s UAC Legislative Committee meeting are online. See them here.
SB 231 is Something Out of a Bad Hollywood Movie
Written on February 28, 2011 at 10:02 pm, by fluidadmin
SB 231 is a very troubling bill. SB 231 would allow the Governor’s Office of Economic Development to circumvent local planning and zoning for the purpose of the creation of a motion picture studio in Park City. The bill finally received language Friday afternoon and was later added to this morning’s Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Standing Committee agenda.
After a half hour of heated debate, the committee chair informed the audience that the bill failed to pass through the proper channels before it could be heard in committee; therefore, the committee would be unable to take any action on the legislation. The bill will be before that committee again tomorrow afternoon at 4:10 PM in room 415 of the State Capitol. We’ll see what happens then.
Counties’ Ability to Collect TRT Themself Likely To Go Away
Written on February 28, 2011 at 10:02 pm, by fluidadmin
On Friday, Brent Gardner and a delegation of county officials from the eight counties who collect the transient room tax (TRT) themselves (rather than allowing the Tax Commission to do it for them) met with the sponsor of HB 82 as well as representatives from the Tax Commission. The reason for the meeting was to see if there wasn’t something that could be done to HB 82 that would allow those counties to continue to collect the TRT.
The goal of HB 82 is to simplify the process hotels have to go through to account for tax exempt government lodgers. An unfortunate result of the legislation is the prohibition of any government entity other than the Tax Commission collecting the transient room tax.
There are a couple of reasons why eight of Utah’s counties have opted to deal with the headache of collecting the tax themselves. First, the Tax Commission charges an administrative fee of 0.8 percent to collect the TRT (until recently that fee was 1.2 percent). And second, with nothing more than their administrative fee to show for their work, the Tax Commission has shown little interest in ensuring that hotels comply with the TRT. As counties have moved to collect their own TRT, they have reported increases in the tax upwards of 10 to 20 percent.
Unfortunately, UAC’s meeting with the sponsor of HB 82 on Friday was fruitless. The sponsor is unwilling to modify the bill and this morning the bill passed out of a Senate Committee. It now goes to the Senate floor where it appears to surely be adopted into law (it has yet to receive a single no vote).
Appropriations
Written on February 24, 2011 at 10:01 pm, by fluidadmin
With new state tax projections revealed this week, the Legislature now begins looking at the budget in earnest. Over the Legislative Session’s first month, various appropriation subcommittees met to discuss all the programs included in the state budget. Now the Executive Appropriations Committee meets to make tough decisions.
Counties are responsible for a number of state pass through programs. And, as always, the Utah Association of Counties follows the budget process closely. This year we’ve got a number of programs that we’d like to see the Legislature fund. A list of some of the more important programs is available here.
Please talk to any of the members of the Executive Appropriations Committee you might know this weekend. Catch them in your communities, if you can. A list of that committee can be found here.
Report on Fifth UAC Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on February 24, 2011 at 10:01 pm, by fluidadmin
Here’s what happened at today’s UAC Legislative Committee meeting:
UAC supports the following bills:
UAC opposes the following bills:
UAC elected to remain neutral on the following bill:
Report on Fourth UAC Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on February 24, 2011 at 9:59 pm, by fluidadmin
Pleanty of business at today’s UAC Legislative Committee.
UAC supports the following bills:
UAC opposes the following bills:
UAC elected to remain neutral on the following bills:
February 24 Legislative Committee Agenda Now Online
Written on February 22, 2011 at 10:00 pm, by fluidadmin
The agenda for this Thursday’s UAC Legislative Committee meeting is now online. Peruse it at your pleasure.
The Latest on the Restaurant Tax
Written on February 16, 2011 at 9:58 pm, by fluidadmin
There have been lots of questions regarding the restaurant tax recently. Let me tell you what we know right now. Earlier in the session, the Taxpayers Association crafted a proposal that would have repelled the restaurant tax and replaced it with a general sales tax. The Taxpayers Association’s proposal was originally tied to legislation that Senator Adams was sponsoring to return the sales tax on food and, consequently, reduce the overall sales tax rate.
Senator Adams made a commitment to the Association of Counties that he would not run the Taxpayers Association’s proposal unless he had the ok from county officials. That being the case, the Senator met with UAC at County Officials Day at the Legislature and laid out the proposal. After hearing his presentation, county officials weighed the pros and cons of the proposal and ultimately asked Senator Adams not to run the legislation. True to his word, Senator Adams has dropped the issue.
Since the proposal originated from the Taxpayers Association, the issue didn’t die with Senator Adams promise not to sponsor a bill. The Taxpayers Association searched for and found another potential sponsor. Senator Valentine has a boxcar bill, SB 246, that he’s promised to use for the Taxpayers Association’s proposal if he finds support within the Senate Republican caucus.
I’m not sure when the caucus might discuss this topic, but it’s clear that if we don’t want to see legislation, our area of focus right now needs to be with our republican Senators. And, based on our opposition to the proposal when it was presented to us at County Officials Day at the Legislature, our major points could be as follows:
We’ll let you know more as it develops.
February 17 Legislative Committee Meeting Agenda Online
Written on February 15, 2011 at 9:58 pm, by fluidadmin
The agenda and other materials for Thursday’s Legislative Committee meeting have been posted here. Please note that our St. George location is not available for this week only.
Midterm Vacancy Bill Keeps Moving on
Written on February 11, 2011 at 9:57 pm, by fluidadmin
HB 248 passed out of Senate committee unanimously this afternoon. The bill, which would remove the county legislative body’s role in the filling of midterm vacancies, now moves onto the Senate floor where it will be voted on for final passage.
Two members of the committee gave assurances to UAC prior to the meeting that they would vote against the bill, but it’s hard to hold to that kind of commitment when only one elected county official is in the room to speak on the bill and that county official speaks in support of it! A member of the Salt Lake Council gave testimony that the Salt Lake County Council took a position to support HB 248 this past Tuesday.
I don’t want to discredit the emails and phone calls that various county officials made to the legislators and, in particular, to members of this Senate committee; but the fact remains that the most effective way to lobby the legislature in a committee hearing is by filling the room with interested parties. I fear we just squandered our best chance to kill this bill. But based on the turnout to today’s committee hearing, perhaps it never was that big of a priority in the first place.
Report on Third UAC Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on February 10, 2011 at 9:56 pm, by fluidadmin
UAC took up a whole bunch of business at today’s Legislative Committee.
UAC supports the following bills:
UAC opposes the following bills:
UAC elected to remain neutral on the following bills:
SB 71 Could Cost Counties a Lot of Money
Written on February 9, 2011 at 9:55 pm, by fluidadmin
SB 71 is a new bill has been introduced that would remove the requirement that taxing entities post a notice of a truth in taxation hearing in the newspaper. In its place, the taxing entity would be required to send out a mailing to all property owners affected by the proposed tax increase regarding the truth in taxation hearing.
In talking to several county auditors (the guys required to post those notices), I’ve gotten a sense of what kind of fiscal impact this might have on county government. If, for example, Salt Lake County were to desire to go through a truth in taxation hearing, the county would have to prepare and print the notice to mail (cost: $26,000) and then mail the notice (cost: $121,000). Salt Lake’s current cost to advertise in the paper: $4,000. For a total fiscal impact of $143,000. And remember that since counties are calendar-year entities, we get to hold two truth in taxation hearings over the course of a year. So the additional cost to Salt Lake under this bill would be $286,000 to go through truth in taxation.
I’ve gotten much of the same from other counties. In Davis we’re estimating a $60,000 impact, in Summit a $22,000 impact, and in Tooele a $14,000 impact. Yikes, you might have to go through truth in taxation just to pay for the notice of a truth in taxation hearing.
February 10 Legislative Committee Meeting Agenda Now Online
Written on February 8, 2011 at 9:55 pm, by fluidadmin
The agenda for Thursday’s Legislative Committee meeting has been posted. Find it here.
Vacancy Bill Unified Police Fee Bill Move on
Written on February 8, 2011 at 9:54 pm, by fluidadmin
This morning HB 248 (the bill that changes the processes for filling county mid-term vacancies) passed out of the House in a rout: 52 to 19. The bill now moves to the Senate where county officials are going to have to work hard on their Senators if they want to see the bill killed.
HB 226, a bill that would prohibit Salt Lake County’s fee to fund the Unified Police Department, passed out of the House as well. The bill was amended on the floor to exempt similar fees within fourth, fifth, and sixth class counties; protecting long-lasting revenue sources for special districts within San Juan and Wasatch Counties.
County Officials Day at the Legislature Recap
Written on February 4, 2011 at 9:54 pm, by fluidadmin
Today was County Officials Day at the Legislature. It was a great success–I can’t think of a year where we had a better turnout. Thanks to all of the county officials and legislators who participated. And special thanks to the Governor who took time out of his very busy schedule to spend some time us.
Hopefully the time our county officials spent with our legislators today will result in a better understand of county interests and concerns. I suppose we’ll find out over the next four and a half weeks.
Staggered County Elections
Written on February 3, 2011 at 9:53 pm, by fluidadmin
This afternoon HB 103 was considered before the House Government Operations Standing Committee. This bill is UAC’s attempt to stagger county elections so that there isn’t an election where all but one commissioner in the county is up for election. As the bill was originally drafted, the county clerk, auditor, sheriff, and attorney would be elected for one six-year term in 2014, after which they would return to four-year terms. Of course, the result of that one six-year term would be a staggered election where some county officials are elected during a Presidential Election and others would be elected on the Midterm Election.
The concept behind the bill was well received; however, the committee was uncomfortable with the onetime six-year term–especially for county sheriffs and attorneys. To alleviate those concerns, the committee amended the bill placing the county treasurer, recorder, surveyor, and assessor on the six-year term track. At which point, the bill passed out of committee.
The bill will next be heard on the House Floor.
13-Punxsutawney Phil has it Wrong
Written on February 2, 2011 at 9:53 pm, by fluidadmin
In Utah, we don’t need no stinking rodent to tell us when winter will end. We’ve got the Legislature to do that. This year, like every year, winter ends the day the legislative session ends (this year it’s March 10).
And just like I do every Groundhog Day, I’m linking a post I wrote several years ago (sadly, it still applies).
Reminder No Legislative Committee Meeting This Week
Written on February 2, 2011 at 9:52 pm, by fluidadmin
There will be no UAC Legislative Committee meeting this week. Instead, county officials should plan on participating in County Officials Day at the Legislature Friday. There we’ll discuss some of the biggest issues affecting county government this session and county officials will have the opportunity to lunch with their Legislators.
Our regularly scheduled Legislative Committee meetings will resume next Thursday, February 10.
New Restaurant Tax Proposal has Pros Cons
Written on February 2, 2011 at 9:50 pm, by fluidadmin
Yesterday several county officials met with Senator Adams and a representative from the Taxpayers Association to discuss a proposal to move the restaurant tax to a countywide sales tax. The meeting was extremely productive as Senator Adams assured us that there would be no legislation unless the counties bought off on the idea. I’m going to attempt to fairly portray the proposal and offer some pros and cons to the proposal as I see them.
The Proposal
The proposed legislation would be contingent on an additional proposal to put sales tax back on food. In an effort to keep such an action revenue neutral the bill would also lower the state sales tax from 4.7 to 4.4.
If the legislature is willing to place the sales tax back on food (and I’ve got to believe that such a proposal is a long shot at best), then the proposal would also repeal the restaurant tax and place a 0.08 percent statewide sales tax (or as close as a number as could be generated to make the sales tax revenue neutral statewide) to replace the lost restaurant tax revenues.
The distribution of this sales tax is what separates this proposal from previous proposals. Rather than creating some sort of hold harmless formula, the sales tax is distributed using the same formula from which restaurant tax sales are currently distributed. This means that all counties will see growth in the new tax as the sales tax grows.
Pros to the Proposal
A major benefit to the passage of this bill would be the end of hostilities with the Restaurant Association (hostilities with the Taxpayers Association, sadly, will never end). If this proposal passed, the Association of Counties likely won’t have to worry about seeing legislation dealing with the TRCC, and given the general sense of confusion regarding what the TRCC is used for, this would be a very good thing. And, if general sales taxes raise at a faster rate than the restaurant tax (as they likely would in an economic boom), the counties would see more TRCC funds than they would if those funds were still tied to the restaurant tax.
Cons to the Proposal
It has been blatantly clear during the recent economic downturn that the restaurant tax is much more stable than the general sales tax. (When we compared 2009 restaurant tax revenues to 2008 restaurant tax revenues, there was only a 4 percent drop. The general sales tax, in comparison dropped 11 percent over the same time.) If and when Utah goes through another patch of economic distress, a revenue source tied to the general sales tax won’t produce like a revenue source tied to the restaurant tax.
So, there you go: my unbiased review of the latest restaurant tax proposal. We’ll discuss this in greater detail Friday during County Officials Day at the Legislature.
Mid-term Vacancy Bill Moves on
Written on February 1, 2011 at 9:49 pm, by fluidadmin
Late yesterday afternoon, HB 248 came out of committee on a 5 to 4 vote. Please look over the vote and be sure to thank those Legislators who voted against it and educate those who voted for it. The bill was amended into something better than what was originally drafted. As I’m sure you’re aware (and if you’re not, you can read my thoughts about the original draft here and here), the original version of the bill changed the process of filling mid-term vacancies in county offices by giving complete authority to a party position titled “party liaison” to fill a vacancy. The amendment clarified that the party liaison would only present the candidate to fill a vacancy, but that the county political party would dictate how that candidate was selected.
Proponents of the bill argued that the bill better reflects the will of the people than the current process–that because vacancies would be filled solely by the vote of party delegates, the process would be more democratic.
I don’t buy that argument and here’s why: I’ve served as a county party delegate and, for the most part, none of my neighbors had any idea that I was their delegate (shoot, even some of the handful of people attending our neighborhood caucus didn’t realizes I was their delegate). Furthermore, after I attended my county convention, I didn’t get a single question from any of my neighbors about the convention or how I voted. In short, I wasn’t held accountable to anyone.
Now, maybe my experience was unique, maybe every other neighborhood caucus holds their delegates accountable for what they do and the whole neighborhood turns out; but somehow I doubt it.
Now, let me tell you what I do know: I know that our county commissions and councils take their responsibilities very seriously. They represent the people in their counties, are scrutinized for their actions, and are interested in placing the most qualified, able people in county government. And, furthermore, I know that the current system works–it provides both the party and our county officials a role in filling vacancies.
This bill is being pushed by party leadership interested in expanding their base of power. Thomas Wright, the Utah Republican Party Chair, publicly testified in the committee yesterday, lambasting the current system. Please take a moment to email him at chair@utgop.org or call him at (800) 230-8824 and let him know why the current system works.
Likewise, please let the Utah State Democratic Party chair, Wayne Holland, know your thoughts on HB 248 by emailing him at wholland@utdemocrats.org or calling him at (801) 328-1212.
And finally, let your Legislators know that you oppose HB 248.
Bad Mid-term Vacancy Bill on This Afternoon’s Agenda
Written on January 31, 2011 at 5:18 pm, by fluidadmin
This afternoon the House Political Subdivisions Committee is considering HB 248 – County Office Vacancies. This is the questionable bill that I blogged about last week that would change the process for appointing mid-term vacancies for county officials. The committee meets in room 450 of the State Capitol at 4:00 PM.
We need county officials to contact the members of this committee and express your concerns (that membership can be found here). We also need county officials at the meeting to demonstrate how you feel about the idea. A UAC bullet sheet for the bill is available here.
Commercial Real Estate Disclosure Bill Moves to House Floor
Written on January 28, 2011 at 5:17 pm, by fluidadmin
HB 185–which is a great bill–passed out of committee this afternoon. The bill would require disclosure to the Multicounty Appraisal Trust of commercial real estate sales so that county assessors could better assess values to commercial real estate. Commercial property is the hardest type of property for our county assessors to assess due to the huge variance in size and scope and the limited number of sales shared with the assessor’s office. If HB 185 passes, it would mean a fairer property tax distribution to Utah’s property taxpayers.
The bill now moves onto the House floor for further consideration.
Resolution Requiring Super-majority For Tax and Fees Increases Dead
Written on January 28, 2011 at 5:16 pm, by fluidadmin
Yesterday, during UAC’s Legislative Committee meeting, county officials took a position to oppose HJR 1, a resolution that would place on the 2012 ballot a constitutional amendment that would require a 2/3 super-majority to raise taxes or fees throughout the state and within any level of government.
Late yesterday afternoon, that resolution was presented before the House Revenue and Taxation Standing Committee and, after much debate, failed to advance to the House floor on a 7-7 vote. Whether or not the resolution returns (it’s a long session and worse bills have been resurrected), yesterday’s vote certainly highlights the difficulty such a resolution would have in mustering the required 2/3 vote to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot.
Would that all bills and resolutions UAC took a position to oppose were dealt with as quickly and in such a manner.
Report of UAC’s Second Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on January 27, 2011 at 5:16 pm, by fluidadmin
UAC took care of the following business during its second Legislative Committee meeting of the year today.
UAC supports the following bill:
# HB 190
UAC opposes the following bills:
# HJR 1
# SB 105
This will be our last Legislative Committee meeting for two weeks. Next Friday is County Officials Day at the Legislature and the decision was made to postpone a meeting of the Legislative Committee a week rather than expecting county officials to travel into Salt Lake for both a Thursday and Friday meeting.
A County Vacancy Bill Even Worse Than Last Year’s
Written on January 26, 2011 at 5:15 pm, by fluidadmin
Last year UAC vigorously fought SB 203 which would have given the complete authority to fill vacancies in an elected county office to the county central committee of the party to which the outgoing officer belongs. We fought the bill arguing that it replaces the open process that is currently in place where the county legislative body selects a replacement from a pool of three candidates presented by the county central committee. Ultimately, the bill failed to pass even after a series of concession were made by the sponsor in an attempt to make it more palatable.
Well, if last year’s bill was bad, this year’s version of the bill is even worse! HB 248 would place the authority to fill vacancies in an elected county office solely in the hands of one individual. Creating a position called the “party liaison,” HB 248 spells out that the party liaison is responsible to submit a name to the county to fill a vacancy in an elected office. County commissions or councils are accountable to the public that elected them. Shoot, even a political party’s county central committee is responsible to its delegates. But who is a party liaison responsible to?
UAC took a position to oppose any changes to the process of filling vacancies in an elected county office at our Annual Convention last November, so we’ll began fighting this ill-conceived bill immediately, but county officials might want to share their concerns with the bill with their Legislators too.
A Change to Legal Notices
Written on January 26, 2011 at 5:15 pm, by fluidadmin
SB 105 would do away with an exemption to posting legal notices in newspapers due to trigger in 2012. The current law would allow for (starting in 2012) any legal notice filed in a county of the first or second class to meet the requirements of the law by publishing that legal notice on a website run by Utah’s newspapers for a $10 charge. SB 105 would require those legal notices to be published both in the newspaper and on the newspapers’ website. If SB 105 passes, the newspapers would be paid twice–once in print and once online–for any legal notice they publish.
I spoke with the bill’s sponsor, Senator Valentine, yesterday about the bill. He expressed concern that for many of Utah’s citizens, the newspaper (rather than the internet) is their primary source of news (he obviously doesn’t know UAC’s tech-savvy membership well enough). For that reason, he’s opposed to doing away with the newspaper notice. I expressed concern that counties would have to pay twice to post a legal notice and he conceded the point and expressed a willingness to amend his bill to remove the $10 charge to post to the web–the end result being a bill that would keep the status quo moving forward.
You’ll have a chance to weigh in on this issue tomorrow at our Legislative Committee meeting as it is on our agenda.
January 27 Legislative Committee Meeting Agenda Online
Written on January 25, 2011 at 5:14 pm, by fluidadmin
The agenda for Thursday’s Legislative Committee meeting has been posted on this website. Most weeks I’d like to have posted it sooner, but today we waited as long as possible in an effort to see more legislation of county interest pop up. Honestly, I can’t think of a session where we’ve seen less at this point.
This is a problem, I suspect, we’ll all long for in a couple of weeks.
Review of UAC’s First Legislative Committee Meeting
Written on January 24, 2011 at 5:13 pm, by fluidadmin
Last Friday, UAC got to an early jump on the Legislative Session with its first Legislative Committee meeting. At that meeting, we took a position to support three early bills that would benefit county government and Utah’s citizens as a whole. Those bills were HB 11 (which I discussed over the interim), HB 46, and HB 185.
We also spent some time talking about UAC’s proposal to add a 5 cent tax to the sale of beer in Utah to help cover the cost of state prisoners incarcerated in county jails as a condition of probation. Click here to read a bullet sheet on the proposed legislation and here for a quick background on the issues associated with condition of probation prisoners. As you can easily imagine, this promises to be a major point of emphasis for UAC this session.
Welcome to the 2011 Legislative Session
Written on January 24, 2011 at 5:10 pm, by fluidadmin
Welcome to the 2011 Legislative Session, everyone. I hope everyone is rested because, we’re in for an intense 46 days, I’m sure.
Let me quickly offer an overview for what you can expect from this website during the session.
# This blog will be updated pretty much daily (Monday through Friday) during the session, here you’ll get specific detail about bills UAC is following as well as the occasional basic Legislative observation (although, I’ll keep most of my thoughts to myself to keep myself and UAC out of trouble).
# Every Tuesday afternoon, we’ll post an agenda for the Thursday UAC Legislative Committee meeting. (I should point out here that the meeting location here at the Capitol Complex has been moved to the much, much nicer Olmstead Room in the Senate Building (the building on the east of the complex) from the dingy basement of the State Office Building.) You can find those agendas at our Calendar section of the site.
# The Legislative Issues section will be updated regularly as more bills are introduced and substituted. This serves as a real time tracking sheet so you’ll want to check it out often.
Any questions concerning the session can be directed towards our crackerjack staff here at UAC. My cell phone number is (801) 209-7786 if you specifically need to talk to me.
