Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances bill offering limited property-tax relief for remote second homes, adds state reimbursement to protect rural counties
Summary
The Utah Senate advanced second-substitute Senate Bill 63 to third reading after adopting a friendly amendment that would make the measure operate like a circuit-breaker: the state reimburses counties for revenue lost by granting limited exemptions to remote secondary residences. The floor vote to send the bill to third reading was 20–8.
Senators on the floor advanced a measure aimed at giving narrowly defined property-tax relief to owners of remote secondary residences, and agreed to a change that shifts the fiscal burden from small counties to the state.
Senator Eldon Maine, sponsor of second substitute Senate Bill 63, told colleagues the bill targets "secondary residences" such as cabins that receive no municipal water or sewer and are not used as rentals or time shares. Maine said supporters include veterans groups and senior organizations who raised the issue after owners on fixed incomes risked losing cabins they built decades ago.
Senator Tiara Hilliard offered a friendly amendment to model reimbursements on the existing circuit-breaker program: when counties lose property-tax revenue because of the exemption, county assessors would apply to the State Tax Commission for reimbursement. "My amendment basically would make this like a circuit breaker," Hilliard said, describing a mechanism that would prevent a local tax shift onto small county residents.
Floor questions focused on scope and fiscal exposure. Senators pressed whether out‑of‑state primary residences could qualify (sponsor: the qualifying primary home must be in Utah) and whether the reimbursement mechanism could create an uncapped liability for the state. Sponsors and proponents repeatedly cited a fiscal estimate in prior committee work of roughly $2–3 million; several senators said they would seek a revised fiscal note and discussed adding a dollar cap on the third reading if necessary.
Opponents warned of a slippery slope. Senator Stevenson called a second home a luxury and argued circuit-breaker resources should prioritize primary homeowners struggling to keep their main residence. Senator Hickman said the narrowly drawn exemption could nevertheless become a "camel's nose under the tent," creating pressure for broader relief later.
After extended debate and the adoption of Hilliard's amendment, the Senate voted to send the second substitute of SB63 to third reading. The presiding officer announced the tally: "Second substitute, Senate Bill 63, has received 20 aye votes, 8 no votes, and passes to the third reading calendar." The sponsor said supporters will work to refine the fiscal note and any caps before third reading.
What happens next: SB63 was advanced to the third-reading calendar; sponsors indicated they will request an updated fiscal note and may propose a statutory cap on state reimbursement before final passage.
