Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recorder Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House approves statutory recorder fee schedule after heated debate
Summary
The House passed House Bill 247 on county recorder fees, moving a multi‑year study’s proposal into statute to standardize fees statewide. Opponents said the change effectively raises many routine recording costs several‑fold without independent audit data; backers said it shifts costs to users and stabilizes recorder operations.
The Utah House of Representatives on Feb. 25 approved House Bill 247, a measure to set county recorder fees in state statute based on a multi‑year study, sending the bill to the Senate after a 50–25 roll‑call vote.
Representative Wilde, sponsor of the bill, told the House the statute codifies a balanced fee schedule developed over three years so counties charge consistent recording fees across Utah. "What this does is set in statute that fee schedule so that every county is on the same playing field," Wilde said.
Opponents challenged the process and the data supporting the increase. Representative Coleman and Representative Ivory asked whether an independent audit had validated the industry study and requested distribution data showing what percentage of filings are single‑page documents versus multi‑page recordings. "We have people in the field asking for a nearly 400% increase with no independent auditing function," Coleman said, adding he would vote against the bill.
Wilde responded that the national group's study, performed by a recorder industry association, provided averages and that financial audits showed recorder fees were too low in many offices. Supporters including Representatives Winder and Mackell argued the fee changes move recorder offices toward a fee‑supported model that covers operational costs rather than relying on general tax revenues.
Representative Winder said processing costs do not scale dramatically with page count and that a fee model aligning user charges with office expenses is appropriate. Representative Mackell, a licensed title and escrow officer, said recorder offices experience long‑standing strain and that fee adjustments were necessary to alleviate pressures.
The House approved the bill on a roll‑call of 50 yes and 25 no. The bill record shows proponents and opponents urged further transparency on the underlying data; the sponsor indicated committee hearings and financial audits informed the proposal. The bill will proceed to the Utah Senate for further consideration.
