Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Representative Albrecht questions property tax exemption for state agency leases in Richfield

February 22, 2024 | 2024 Utah Legislature, Utah Legislature, Utah Legislative Branch, Utah



Black Friday Offer

Get Lifetime Access to Full Government Meeting Transcripts

Lifetime access to full videos, transcriptions, searches, and alerts at a county, city, state, and federal level.

$99/year $199 LIFETIME
Founder Member One-Time Payment

Full Video Access

Watch full, unedited government meeting videos

Unlimited Transcripts

Access and analyze unlimited searchable transcripts

Real-Time Alerts

Get real-time alerts on policies & leaders you track

AI-Generated Summaries

Read AI-generated summaries of meeting discussions

Unlimited Searches

Perform unlimited searches with no monthly limits

Claim Your Spot Now

Limited Spots Available • 30-day money-back guarantee

This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Representative Albrecht questions property tax exemption for state agency leases in Richfield
A proposed bill aimed at exempting state agencies from property taxes on leased buildings took center stage during the recent legislative session in Utah. Representative Albrecht led the discussion, clarifying that if a state agency, such as the Division of Natural Resources (DNR), leases a property for exclusive use under a triple net lease, the landlord could be exempt from property taxes for that year.

Albrecht emphasized that this provision is designed to streamline operations for state agencies, arguing that it does not impact the overall property tax revenue collected by counties. "This should make zero difference in the net amount of property taxes that a county or taxing entity will collect," he stated, addressing concerns about potential financial implications.

The fiscal note associated with the bill indicated that the cost to the state or counties would be negligible, with Albrecht suggesting that the number of entities affected would be minimal. Representative Eliason echoed this sentiment, reinforcing that it does not make sense for governmental entities to pay property taxes, as the change would not alter the total tax revenue.

The discussion concluded without further debate, signaling a consensus on the bill's intent to facilitate state operations without financial repercussions for local governments. As the legislative session progresses, this bill could pave the way for more efficient use of state resources.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Utah articles free in 2025

Excel Chiropractic
Excel Chiropractic
Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI