Senate narrowly rejects bill to let small towns treat vacant land as 'blight' for redevelopment

The Utah Senate on Feb. 24, 1999 rejected Senate Bill 171, a sponsor‑backed change to redevelopment agency law that would have allowed certain small towns to treat vacant property as 'blight' for tax‑increment financing.

Sponsor Senator Pete Knudson said the measure was intended to give very small communities a tool for economic development, citing remote towns such as Grouse Creek that struggle to attract business. "Like all pendulums, sometimes they swing a little too far," Knudson told colleagues as he sought the body's support for the bill.

Opponents, led by Senator Stevenson, warned the change would reverse recent legislative efforts to limit redevelopment abuses and could divert revenue away from school districts and county governments. Stevenson described a past RDA project in Draper where new redevelopment incentives, he said, contributed to longtime local businesses closing: "That redevelopment agency caused people to lose their life savings in businesses that they have been supporting in our community for years." The senator said such outcomes underscored the need for tight safeguards.

Members debated several floor amendments, including one to restrict the change to "towns" only (a proposed narrowing that would have altered how the bill applied to municipalities). That amendment failed (on the floor vote to amend), and the full bill was then put to a roll call. The final recorded result on the third reading was 13 votes in favor and 14 opposed; the bill therefore failed on the floor.

Senator Knudson asked members to remember the bill's aim to assist small, remote communities that need economic tools. Opponents stressed the risk of enabling a "0‑sum" dynamic where redevelopment subsidies in one place undercut established local businesses and local tax bases.

With the bill defeated, debate concluded and the Senate proceeded to other items on the calendar.