Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cities warn against narrowing user‑fee authority; transportation utility fee, billboard and broadband bills on radar
Summary
League staff led a discussion and Slido poll about municipal fee authority and potential legislation limiting who pays user fees; members flagged concerns about exempting churches/nonprofits from transportation utility fees, and staff noted upcoming bills on billboard relocation and municipal broadband.
League staff discussed the legal and political differences between taxes and fees and asked LPC members to weigh in on proposed limitations to municipal user‑fee authority, especially proposals that would exempt certain users (for example, houses of worship) from transportation utility fees.
Staff reiterated legal principles: user fees should be reasonably related to use and only spent for the purpose related to that use. Participants said restricting who pays user fees risks eroding municipal fee authority. League staff said Representative Karen Peterson will return House Bill 367 as HB367‑2 with additional language targeting methodology for transportation utility fees and public‑safety fees.
Attendees completed a Slido poll on whether members would oppose legislation to exempt churches and nonprofits from user fees; many indicated they would oppose such exemptions and would use political capital to oppose them. Several members pointed out major institutional users (large hospitals and universities) also significantly drive traffic and infrastructure demand.
Staff also flagged other revenue and infrastructure‑related items: a UDOT surplus‑land appropriation to support affordable owner‑occupied housing on state parcels, an RFP and pilot for UDOT to assume some intersection lighting duties (even on city roads), and a possible billboard relocation proposal (changes to proximity rules) and SB249 (nuclear commission) that may limit local incentives for energy projects. Staff said they are monitoring HB198 (billboard relocation) and SB165 (related proposals) and would follow up on impacts to local planning.
Why it matters: Narrowing fee authority or exempting categories of users from fees can shift costs to other ratepayers, complicate project finance and reduce municipalities’ ability to manage transportation and public‑safety impacts. Several members urged the League to defend broad fee authority and to provide model methodologies for transportation utility fees.
What’s next: League staff will continue technical conversations and legislative negotiations on methodology, and will convene working groups on tourism tax and transportation‑fee policy.
