Salt Lake Tribune
Weekly Ad Specials
No blank check: UTA should not treat transit tax as entitlement
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

The voters of Salt Lake County approved a quarter-cent sales tax increase a year ago to build new transportation projects, among them FrontRunner commuter rail and two new TRAX light-rail lines. But that vote should not entitle the Utah Transit Authority to collect the tax indefinitely.

UTA is arguing that it intended all along to collect the tax for 50 years in order to pay the operation and maintenance costs, as well as the capital costs, of these projects.

Not so fast, say some members of the Salt Lake County Council. The deal was for the tax increase to pay to build and operate the systems until their 30-year bonds are paid off, but no longer.

We agree with the members of the County Council who say the vote last year was not a blank check for UTA. Once the bonds to finance construction of the systems are paid off, UTA's claim on the tax should end.

Three decades from now, there may be better or more pressing uses for that tax revenue. No one today can say. Public priorities often change with the times.

Of course, some tax revenue may be necessary to continue to operate the rail systems beyond the life of the bonds. But it would be surprising if those costs were as steep as the initial investment to build the system from scratch.

Today's estimate to operate and maintain the Salt Lake County portion of FrontRunner for a year is $7.5 million. The Mid-Jordan TRAX line would cost about $4.9 million; the West Valley City TRAX line would be about $4.5 million. But the only certainty is that these are estimates. Reality could be different.

Nor can anyone predict what local economic conditions will be over the life of the bonds. The tax may raise more revenue than projected; it might raise less.

The Legislative Auditor General has pointed out that the state law that authorizes the tax is vague on the question of whether it can be used for operations and maintenance. But it would not make much sense to provide a funding source to build the system but not to operate and maintain it.

UTA and government officials need to iron this out. But UTA should not be allowed to treat last year's vote as an entitlement.

We agree with the members of the County Council who say the vote last year was not a blank check for UTA. Once the bonds to finance construction of the systems are paid off, UTA's claim on the tax should end.

Article Tools

 
Affiliates and Partners