This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2017, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
A proposal intended to boost water bills, and lower property taxes, for many Utahns stalled at its first committee hearing.
SB151 would prohibit water districts from obtaining more than 15 percent of their income from property taxes, forcing the districts to raise water rates or find other ways to make up the difference.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Jim Dabakis, D-Salt Lake City, pitched the proposal as an effort to end subsidies for water delivery and allow the free market to determine the price of water. He believes this would lead to more families watching their water use to keep their monthly bill low. His legislation exempts rural water districts and the Central Utah Water Conservancy District, and included provisions that would allow water districts to raise the percentage cap in case of emergencies.
"This gets to the basic, core value of water in this state," Dabakis said. "For thirty-some years, I have made a payroll. And I have to live with supply and demand, and if I don't, I'm out of business, it's that simple. That works everywhere except in government. Government somehow has the ability to tip the scale."
But the bill's detractors, including Sen. Allen Christensen, R-Ogden, argued the water districts use the property taxes for purposes that benefit the community, and said they suspected the bill had ulterior motives.
"I'm for a tax decrease," he said. "But I think there are hidden motives behind this bill, and think it handicaps the people who are trying to help us out."
The Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee voted 4-2 to table the bill. Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, a cosponsor, said although his vacation home in Southern Utah does not obtain water from the Washington County Water Conservancy District, he still pays the water district's property tax.
"You're forcing your neighbors to pick up the cost," he said. "I thought we were a conservative state. Why do we believe in a socialized water structure?"
Ron Thompson, general manager of the Washington County Water Conservancy District, said the water district did collect taxes on properties it did not provide with water, but argued the residents who live in the residences work, shop and attend school in St. George. Consequently, he said, they benefit from the water the Washington County Water District provides. Thompson said the water district had also helped neighboring communities through water shortages and infrastructure failures, and so when "they say they get no benefit…that is a very narrow view of what really happens."
Representatives of both the Jordan Valley and Weber Basin water districts spoke against the bill, as did the Utah Association of Special Districts and the Utah Division of Water Resources. Environmental advocacy groups and private residents present at the meeting spoke in favor of the bill.
Dabakis noted the large number of interested citizens who attended the hearing, as well as the distribution of opinions throughout the crowd.
"We have virtually every entrenched water group here, and they are all unanimous that they don't like this," he said. "They like it the way it is….We need to change this. And if we don't send a message, in 10 years we will still hear the same arguments. We either bring free enterprise into water, or we will continue to be wasteful."
But Christensen, while making the motion to table the bill, rebuked his fellow senator.
"Water conservation districts are not the enemy," he said. "They're working on our side."
Twitter: @EmaPen