Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Exemptions Rural Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves Rural Housing exemptions but withholds three Southwell Palms parcels pending development
Summary
Utah County Commissioners approved continued property tax-exemption status for most Southwell Palms rural housing parcels but excluded three parcels (0049, 0114, 0070) after staff said they lacked evidence of irrevocable development; applicants were directed to meet with staff and may pursue a county-level abatement process.
Utah County Commissioners on April 20 approved continued property tax-exemption status for most parcels held by Southwell Palms, a rural housing developer, but voted to exclude three larger parcels—serial numbers 0049, 0114 and 0070—after county staff said those tracts lacked evidence of development.
The exclusions came after a lengthy presentation from Brad Bishop, executive director of Southwell Palms, who described progress on several subdivisions and said two of the three disputed parcels have utilities stubbed into them while the third in Payson faces an unresolved environmental review. Bishop said the Payson parcel had been purchased about three years ago with HUD funds and that the organization has completed improvements and home construction on other phases of its projects.
County auditor staff and Gina Case told the board they had visited the three parcels and found no curb, gutter or recorded plats for those specific tracts—features the auditor’s office said it has treated in prior years as evidence that a lot is “irrevocably committed” to low-income housing. Mandy Norris and other staff recommended greater clarification before approving exemptions on those parcels.
Commission legal counsel Adam Beck explained options for the applicant if the board declined the exemption now: Southwell Palms could return through the county’s “green folder” process under Utah Code 13-4-7 (commonly used to request county-level tax reductions) to ask the County Commission to abate taxes for 2025, or submit a corrected/new exemption application next year. Beck and staff also cited a State Tax Commission decision from December 2015 as a precedent in which the commission found lots to be exempt where records showed utilities, storm drains, curb, gutter, sidewalks and streets.
After discussion, a commissioner moved to approve item 6 while excluding the three identified parcels; another commissioner seconded the motion. The board voted to approve the exemptions for the remaining parcels; the motion carried by voice vote (ayes recorded). Staff and Bishop were directed to meet to clarify the development status and, if the parcels meet the county’s standards, to return with additional documentation or pursue the green-folder abatement process.
Why it matters: Continued exemptions affect the county’s tax base and the pace of affordable-home construction. County staff rely on physical infrastructure (plat recordings, curb and gutter, utilities) and prior State Tax Commission precedent when deciding whether land is “irrevocably committed” to rural housing programs.
What’s next: Southwell Palms will meet with county staff to clarify timelines and documentation; the organization may reapply or seek a county-level abatement for the two parcels whose status staff questioned. The board’s decision included an explicit exclusion of serial numbers 0049, 0114 and 0070 for 2025.
