Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Arts Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate narrows county arts tax after heated debate; substitute SB 109 advances to third reading
Summary
After several hours of debate over how revenues should be shared, the Utah Senate removed a statewide‑sharing provision from substitute SB 109 — a county option sales tax to fund botanical, cultural and zoological organizations — and voted to advance the bill to third reading.
Get email alerts on the Arts Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Salt Lake City — The Utah Senate on Feb. 18 debated substitute Senate Bill 109, a county‑option sales tax measure that would let counties ask voters to impose a 0.1 percent sales tax to support botanical, cultural and zoological organizations. After extended floor debate about whether revenue collected in one county should be redistributed to participating counties, the body voted to remove language that required statewide sharing and then advanced the substitute to third reading.
Senator Bartle, the bill’s floor sponsor, said the measure would “permit the voters, if they want, to vote on increasing their sales tax within their county by 1 tenth of 1%,” arguing the option would stabilize major arts organizations and help them survive financially. Bartle framed the proposal as a preservation measure to protect institutions such as the Utah Symphony and Ballet West and said the tax would be available only where local voters approve it.
Opponents contended the committee’s original distribution language would make Salt Lake County voters subsidize arts programs elsewhere and could undermine voter support. Senator Black argued the sharing language was unfair to counties that would raise the tax locally, saying it would be “totally unfair if we raise money here to give it to other counties.” Senator Stevenson warned that a provision sending money out of Salt Lake County could “gut the viability” of the ballot measure and reduce the bill’s chance of passage.
Floor debate focused on two practical questions: whether tax proceeds should be split by point‑of‑sale and population formulas (a change in a floor amendment referencing subsection 59‑12‑205 section 2) and whether counties that chose to impose the tax should retain the bulk of the receipts. Supporters said the measure could also free state appropriations for other local purposes if local revenue replaced some state support; Senator Bartle noted a provision that could relieve a roughly $1 million annual appropriation to a state zoo if Salt Lake County adopted the option.
After discussion and a standing division, the Senate voted to delete the committee’s sharing language and keep the bill’s county‑option structure intact. Multiple senators declared conflicts of interest before the final tally because they serve on arts boards; the clerk recorded the vote as 23 ayes, 3 nays, with 3 absent. Presiding officers later clarified the bill would be placed on the third‑reading calendar for final passage.
The next procedural step is third reading, where the Senate will take a final vote on the amended substitute. If passed, the measure would allow counties to place a local option ballot question before voters; it would take effect in counties that adopt the tax if electorates approve it.
