Citizen Portal
Sign In

Committee backs changes to Truth-in-Taxation process to give public earlier notice

Utah Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · February 17, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House Bill 236 would require taxing entities to hold a May meeting when contemplating tax increases, publish two budgets (one without the increase and one with), and operate on the budget without the increase until the Truth-in-Taxation hearing. The committee passed the substitute unanimously.

The committee unanimously recommended House Bill 236, a bill aimed at giving the public earlier and clearer information when local governments consider property-tax increases.

Rep. Peterson said the bill requires fiscal entities (school districts, cities and certain special service districts) to discuss potential tax increases in a May public meeting and to notify the tax commission. Jurisdictions would have to publish two budgets: an operating budget that does not include a proposed tax increase and a second budget that reflects the tax increase. Under current practice, jurisdictions commonly adopt budgets that assume the increase; HB 236 would require jurisdictions to operate on the operating budget until a Truth-in-Taxation hearing is held, preventing premature hiring or purchases tied to an unfinalized tax increase.

Supporters — including the Utah Taxpayers Association and the Utah Chamber — said the change improves transparency and gives taxpayers clearer information ahead of formal hearings. Committee members asked about how strictly entities must adhere to items included in the tax-linked budget and whether the bill could be gamed; the sponsor said the approach is designed to encourage accurate public disclosure and that budgets still require public hearings to move to a higher-tax scenario.

The committee adopted a substitute and gave the bill a favorable recommendation. The sponsor and supporters indicated ongoing conversations with cities and districts to refine implementation details.