Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jordan Valley Water explains $3.1M property-tax increase, council presses on public-benefit and rate vs. tax
Summary
Jordan Valley Water presented a budget that includes a proposed property-tax increase to fund capital projects and debt service, including a $100 million treatment-plant expansion in Herriman. Councilmembers probed the mix of property tax and user rates, the district’s public‑benefit study and whether operational costs could be cut instead.
Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District officials described a budget that includes both a standard water-rate increase and a proposed property-tax boost to fund large capital projects and bond debt service.
Dave Martin, Jordan Valley’s chief financial officer and treasurer and a Herriman resident, told the city council the district recently approved a $100,000,000 project to expand the treatment plant in Herriman that will be implemented over the next four years and that the district plans additional bonding in 2027. Martin said the district budget includes a water-rate increase (an average 4.9% increase) and a property-tax increase to raise about $3,100,000 in the district service area; he explained the tax revenue helps fund operations and repay bonds that finance multi-year capital projects.
Council members pressed district officials on why the funding package relies on property tax rather than user fees and asked that the district look for additional operating cuts. One councilmember noted a study the board discussed that estimated Jordan Valley’s public benefit at roughly $20,000,000 and contrasted that with current property-tax revenue near $30,000,000 (rising to roughly $33,000,000 with the proposed increase). The council member warned that if the legislature narrows districts’ property-tax authority, reliance on property tax for operations could become unsustainable and argued the district should prioritize operational reductions over new taxes.
Martin said Jordan Valley uses property taxes and bonding as complementary, stable revenue sources that support long‑range planning and favorable bond ratings. He also noted the district’s 10-year financial plan projects the possibility of two additional property-tax increases over that period, tied to when major projects come online.
On conservation and rates, Martin said rate-setting uses a consultant who calculates the revenue requirement annually; he acknowledged the tension that conservation lowers demand while the district still needs stable revenue to maintain the system and repay debt.
Councilmembers repeatedly urged the district to separate operational funding from capital budgeting where possible and to minimize reliance on property tax for recurring expenses. Martin and the council agreed the board has discretion to seek alternatives and that trustees who represent differing areas will continue to press for budget caution.
