[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6345149,"mediaKeyId","2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45","parentId",2249615,"title","Panel approves requiring quorum at truth-in-taxation hearings after citizen testimony about empty-room meetings","audioSeconds",839,"startMs",2905000,"endMs",3744000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45&start=2905&end=3744","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45/thumbnail_2905000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6345149/Utah/Panel-approves-requiring-quorum-at-truth-in-taxation-hearings-after-citizen-testimony-about-empty-room-meetings","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345149-13300da1f9957e2c74ebafe238d985d1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153390&Signature=MxCaQ9tAu7rDgEMXXMUQT9~FjfgAuioYfPj6c6J50uSQMFMyHnjXxCj4ponmNwMktfnlca-5wB5J0fi6gFo6KN6JHk7iuc2GumRZKyV-BUa6gCmEoHqk9qODdOzGzYzy-42Mk5ykeoLwglvO7PeDIMlIYK6zIWyE6qp1NAPOm4M2MTnBVCtIbOHZWtBhndyBjwF0y3RA0k8R8ua6vqu1~Kw6IN-CKFoO37ddGLJM6IjNBrP-Wpwe41hgPi1luKFUmdsAJzDAm2rMqoIphfsF6t~qLN5UHSTiuSrUUcwnQX6EefyS0wwQDX1rRBcbpttJJiJGd7WYoQW7QvelEJbr-w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Utah State Legislature","date","2025-02-07T00:00:00Z","article","Senator Baldry introduced SB 95 to require that truth-in-taxation hearings comply with the Open and Public Meetings Act definition of a meeting, meaning a quorum of the governing board must be present during such hearings.

The sponsor said the bill is intended to ensure taxpayers have a meaningful opportunity to be heard before elected or governing boards vote on property tax rate increases. \"We have this truth in taxation... The whole purpose of this is to be heard and to hear the public and have their input,\" the senator said.

Utah County Commissioner Amelia Powers Gardner testified in support, calling it a transparency measure: \"I can't even fathom having a truth in taxation hearing without having a quorum of your voting members there. The purpose is transparency,\" she said.

John Gadd, a resident who described attending a Central Utah Water Conservancy District truth-in-taxation hearing in August 2024, recounted that only two of 17 trustees were present at the public hearing; the following day the full board met and unanimously approved the tax increase. He asked the committee to close the loophole that allowed a hearing with no quorum.

Representatives and stakeholders discussed the practical effect of the change; members asked whether remote attendance or brief absences would invalidate a hearing and noted the bill applies the meeting definition already found in statute. Carson Eilers of the Utah League of Cities and Towns said members support the change as codifying common practice and avoiding future confusion.

The committee voted unanimously to recommend SB 95 favorably.

Ending

The committee sent SB 95 forward with a favorable recommendation; supporters said it will prevent taxpayers from facing hearings where the governing board is not present to hear testimony prior to voting on tax increases.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Revenue and Taxation Committee - February 07, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","SB 95 clarifies that a truth-in-taxation hearing must meet the Open and Public Meetings Act definition of a meeting — i.e., a quorum of the governing board must be present — after testimony that boards have held hearings with few or no members present.","taxTitle","2025 Utah Legislature, Utah Legislature, Utah Legislative Branch, Utah","taxId",78171,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6345157,"Panel approves bill giving Division of Drinking Water authority to propose consumption-based fee; agency estimates 75¢ per household annually",663,2221000,2884000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45&start=2221&end=2884","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45/thumbnail_2221000.jpg","/articles/6345157/Utah/Panel-approves-bill-giving-Division-of-Drinking-Water-authority-to-propose-consumption-based-fee-agency-estimates-75-per-household-annually","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345157-dc236f70d937ff13e68a2ce15fd421de/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153390&Signature=MBgeBsN3R4d7erjbSEOtfbJdyJXgUoPuSo-EjD4brwSwn1TFphPpsIK0kU4cbpCez8GasM6ddgPHkjCiAvMxIGRVoGe5JWXdl12uSG5OZR1jpKiqKqbBKCaHVb97g7S2YvsWJ6ZsFJDXOLAXLPg1rOVALrMvTnMJ9m8o7OEepOYkXMUmwJ7LDrLLb2S2NiKuoqIJM9OhTIoyS9lrpp59toe~jJMTcGh37iPXmTnzz6G4xVAZZLFCF~UWHEQscObJTmOIHAoC33kG~780tHqW9aNMQsITH2UoWS5K4oWqCzXfwfg~Hb3r1JW3nmY21xf~cPxrUNNLMCt8O8NoFMkl2g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 80, presented by the sponsor, would grant the Division of Drinking Water fee authority to propose a consumption-based fee to fund drinking-water testing and related work if federal funding declines. The bill file does not itself set a fee; any fee proposed by the division would later require legislative approval.

Sponsor remarks emphasized that federal funding for drinking-water programs has plateaued and that state fee authority would allow the division to seek sustainable revenue to continue testing and regulatory work. \"The consumption idea kind of held strong... because I think it does have a little component of conservation in it,\" the sponsor said when describing the bill's structure.

Nathan Bracken, a water attorney testifying for the rural water association, cautioned that consumption varies by system and that conservation could lower the fee base over time. He also suggested that mandatory pass-through line-item fees be exempted from some special-district public-hearing requirements to avoid unnecessary notice burdens.

Nathan Lundstedt, director of the Division of Drinking Water, provided a preliminary estimate of the consumer impact. \"We were anticipating, 75¢ per year per equivalent residential connection or home,\" Lundstedt said. The division explained the fee would be calculated by equivalent residential connections (ERCs); businesses that use more water would be charged proportionally higher ERC counts.

Leah Hansen, a resident of Saratoga Springs, urged the committee to preserve transparency and retain a line-item on bills so customers understand new charges.

The committee adopted the first substitute for SB 80 and voted to pass the substitute bill with a favorable recommendation. Members noted that any specific fee would return to the Legislature for approval and that subdivisions or special districts could apply local notice rules if they pass costs through to customers.

Ending

SB 80 passed the committee as substituted and will advance subject to normal legislative review of any fee proposals from the Division of Drinking Water.","The committee adopted a substitute and sent SB 80 forward after sponsors said the bill would allow the Division of Drinking Water to propose a consumption-based fee (subject to legislative approval). The division estimated a preliminary per-household impact of roughly $0.75 per year, based on equivalent residential connections.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6345160,"Committee clears large technical-code cleanup bill with substitute",568,1652000,2220000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45&start=1652&end=2220","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45/thumbnail_1652000.jpg","/articles/6345160/Utah/Committee-clears-large-technical-code-cleanup-bill-with-substitute","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345160-2e2fb307c29b3b42cf7ed6aa3a444129/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153390&Signature=bKbJVLB6FgTNPFWnZSJ2rwTHGD8p9dOr-udhGd~vzzGPY3IQlx7VIPJRIW1ulFTRjJJZH3aVOQxbKWEop0LAjfnVAACttsAyfvFIRRoSHFb5EALwRXOtRXXyoeZW1f-08khidT4~GxoRwJdVR5CM1zDTKW7LhpNVrGP9-mypxehee~0d7DvLi6WImGDgVtFRLsqcFxftRI65oCimTBeLfVgD4GJaP8EpRSHFcTwN3u4aWuZCievoWG-Xdc-d8Fr1sap4Rzd3UIPiAE~bR4rnzj5OcNm2y7Nnm3ZuaJZ1fEkXKhHclQj6-LavuNPSY-0SnMDunyfvCYQQEN8XgfXJwA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senator Kwan presented SB 79, a large technical-code cleanup bill that replaces outdated phrasing and harmonizes statutory language to current drafting guidelines. \"This bill is just it's a technical cleanup bill. There's no policy involved in any of this,\" the senator said, adding that the substitute contains a coordinating clause to avoid conflicts with bills enacted during the same session.

The sponsor explained the measure updates residual code dating from 1971 through recent years and neutralizes dated pronouns and phrasing. The sponsor described the substitute as the last piece of a multiyear cleanup project.

Representative Daley Provo moved adoption of the first substitute and later moved to pass the substitute bill out with a favorable recommendation. Committee members thanked the Legislative Research and General Counsel office for managing hundreds of code-line edits. The committee approved both the substitute and the motion to pass SB 79 with unanimous votes.

Ending

The committee sent first-substitute SB 79 forward with a favorable recommendation after unanimous voice votes and no public testimony opposed the measure.","Members unanimously adopted a substitute to SB 79, a technical cleanup of Utah Code drafted to align language with current bill-drafting standards; the sponsor said the measure contains no policy changes.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6345165,"Committee pauses bill expanding state payments for 911 dispatch operations after fiscal questions",1609,42000,1651000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45&start=42&end=1651","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249615-e4b7670a8a658e2606de50b8457aba45/thumbnail_42000.jpg","/articles/6345165/Utah/Committee-pauses-bill-expanding-state-payments-for-911-dispatch-operations-after-fiscal-questions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345165-adda23957221d2af78828ec91afc4314/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153390&Signature=SeN967FFhood6Hs65jfuzbWOWaKuVmObEa-lgRGhAtyIgGDbpXIEk6om2Y3a-wWzQebVWrK68qYyBxUW-YH7XZaxPW8AhU84TEFckkv3BhdoeQwjzp5b0HKb3psF5SP1k0u4rf7hO-qz4tEHYj9SLhHLlgGdJe5yrOJszdu~QkClPMQjTiCNUCTm2bpPNioARCpeWwLTwhrb~g9Xn1HNr7HNTt31-3j2HLCb~2MhaRtQTLfYODaPuUgO0senwHsXui~HLgPeiSBIY0jkinwfnZtIcD9iKWteqqAz2sGghiUR-xFCDLWvJ32KeBDaBiaziPOGhRvN-0~9bDrvqmhO3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Zachary Watkins brought HB 116, a bill about public safety answering points (PSAPs), and a sponsor amendment that would expand the state's role in paying dispatcher-related costs.

The bill and the amendment would increase the Department of Public Safety's share of PSAP personnel costs. \"For those of you that don't know what an answering point is, that's what it is is our, dispatch centers,\" Representative Watkins told the committee, adding that the sponsor amendment \"kinda changes the whole bill.\"

Mayor Michael Coriannis of Price told the panel small, rural cities are struggling to match higher dispatcher pay that the state now funds at least in part. \"When those employees are getting raises, it impacts our city, officers,\" he said. He described local difficulty matching raises for police when dispatcher pay increases are set at the state level and suggested shifting costs could allow cities to reallocate local dollars toward officer pay.

Colonel Mike Rapich of the Utah Highway Patrol, who also identified himself as a deputy commissioner with the Department of Public Safety, described how PSAP funding is currently structured and estimated the fiscal effect of the amendment. \"The Department of Public Safety operates 5 PSAPs within the state,\" Rapich said, and described a funding mix in which dedicated credits provide roughly 40% of operating budgets for those centers. He testified that replacing that dedicated-credit share with state appropriations would likely be on the order of $7,000,000.

Committee members pressed the sponsor and DPS on how the amendment would change which counties and centers are covered and on how the dedicated credits and general fund would be affected. Representative Christopherson asked whether there is money in the dedicated-credit fund and how its reallocation would affect other uses; the sponsor and witnesses said an appropriation would be required and that the fiscal note had to be updated after the amendment was adopted.

The committee adopted Amendment 1 on the record. Representative Provo moved the amendment; the chair called the vote and the committee \"Aye,\" and the chair ruled it passed unanimously. After adopting the amendment, Representative Kyle moved to hold HB 116 so staff could obtain an updated fiscal estimate; members discussed that the committee's appropriations process is nearly complete but that the issue is real for rural communities, and several members expressed willingness to continue working with the sponsor.

The committee voted unanimously to hold HB 116 as amended pending a revised fiscal note and further work.

Ending

The committee did not advance the bill to the next step; rather, it adopted Amendment 1 to create a fuller fiscal picture and then held HB 116 to allow the updated fiscal analysis to be prepared. Witnesses and sponsors stressed the bill was intended to ease cost pressure on small rural jurisdictions that contract with state-operated PSAPs, while Department of Public Safety staff warned the change would represent a significant ongoing appropriation for the state.","Lawmakers advanced an amendment to HB 116 that would shift more personnel costs for public safety answering points to the state, but then voted to hold the bill pending an updated fiscal note after witnesses estimated the change could add about $7 million in ongoing costs.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Panel approves requiring quorum at truth-in-taxation hearings after citizen testimony about empty-room meetings

Panel approves bill giving Division of Drinking Water authority to propose consumption-based fee; agency estimates 75¢ per household annually

Committee clears large technical-code cleanup bill with substitute

Committee pauses bill expanding state payments for 911 dispatch operations after fiscal questions