Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Transit Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

UTA briefings prompt discussion of 'fifth penny' sales tax and control of funds

Utah County Commission Meeting Minutes · November 9, 2022
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A UTA representative told commissioners the current 'fifth penny' statute is transit-focused and that legislators are considering extending or expanding the authority (including proposals to channel part of it to roads); commissioners asked whether counties that enact the authority retain spending control once the funds flow back from the state.

Jeff Aserson of the Utah Transit Authority updated county leaders on state discussions over the 'fifth penny' sales-tax authority. Aserson said the statutory authority currently directs the revenue to transit purposes and that some legislators are considering extending the statute’s sunset date and, in some proposals, expanding allowable uses to include local road projects.

Aserson told commissioners that Senator Wayne Harper and Representative Kristofferson have been involved in related discussions and that, as currently understood, if a county enacts the authority the collections pass through the state and then return to the county, where the county commission would have jurisdiction to decide between service or infrastructure consistent with the statute. "Senator Harper has stated it was specifically for transit," Aserson said.

Commissioners voiced concerns about the political appetite for a county-level tax and the economic context for potential tax adoption. Several commissioners noted inflation and household burden as points of caution and asked whether enacting the tax now could preserve an option for future adjustments if state law changes. Aserson said counties that enact current language should have the option to determine how any future expanded share is spent, but stressed that legislative sponsors may resist changing the original transit-focused intent.

No action was taken; commissioners asked staff to correct the agenda language (change 'roads' to 'transit') and to monitor legislative activity on the proposal.