Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Agency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes SB184 with changes limiting RDA powers and imposing moratorium
Summary
Second-substitute SB184—aimed at redevelopment agency (RDA) reform—passed the House after divided votes that restored original February dates on parts of the bill and adopted limits including a one-year moratorium on retail RDAs, prohibition on certain RDA fund uses and restrictions on eminent domain.
The Utah House passed second-substitute Senate Bill 184 on March 1 after floor votes on technical amendments and two-part substitute motions that had been divided for separate consideration.
Representative Dougal, sponsor of the RDA-focused measure, moved an amendment and later a substitute motion to adjust dates in the bill back to February 15 (the original date before Senate amendment to February 24). Proponents, including Representative Allen, argued the earlier date was the one cities and redevelopment agencies had been relying upon; opponents warned about opening a back door to rushed applications. The House divided the substitute and approved both parts, including the date change on a 37–33 vote.
Dougal summarized the bill as prohibiting extensions of RDAs, banning use of RDA funds for stadium construction, eliminating eminent-domain use in RDAs, requiring blight studies to return to taxing-entity committee review and imposing a one-year moratorium on retail RDAs. Representatives described the measure as the product of compromise among stakeholders; Representative Dougal asked for support to send the bill back to the Senate.
The final recorded vote found second-substitute SB184 passed the House 56–12 and referred the bill to the Senate. Representatives who declared conflicts and those who had city-level concerns emphasized the sensitivity of redevelopment timetables. The House also approved several technical changes under amendment number 3 before final passage.
SB184 will proceed to the Senate for concurrence; several cities and redevelopment agencies that had started studies between mid- and late-February were the subject of floor discussion about whether date changes would affect their work.
