We went to Utah Senator Wayne Harper to explain his support for the amendment and to Utah Representative Brian King to explain why he opposes it. Both agree that changing the state constitution should be a rare event – only done for a very good reason.
Senator Wayne Harper, who pushed the bill on Capitol Hill to fellow Utah lawmakers, said this is a bill about making government more transparent. It’s also about ensuring that state entities like schools and local governments, who are usually tax exempt, don’t pay property taxes on equipment they lease from private companies. Examples of such equipment are vehicles, heavy equipment and copy machines.
Harper said he’s not sure how much money schools for example, would save by not paying the property tax on equipment like copiers. He said small districts could save $1,000 per year while larger school districts could save tens of thousands.
Harpers said fiscal analysts from the state said it was too difficult to figure out how much money would be saved for these public entities because equipment is taxed according to value. That value and the tax on that piece of equipment changes every year because it depreciates.
He said it doesn’t make sense to give school tax money, then turn around and take it away by making them pay a property tax on this equipment.
“I’ve heard from two different school districts that this doesn’t make sense,” said Harper.
When asked whether any private individual or company would benefit from this constitutional amendment, he said “no.”
State representative Brian King said he voted “no” on amendment “C” on capitol hill and said he will vote “no” on election day too.
King said when presenting the amendment on capitol hill to lawmakers, Harper and some supporters did not give a clear explanation of why changing the constitution was necessary. He said too many questions remain.
“Unless we understand something thoroughly and feel good about itwe shouldn’t vote for it,” he said.
King said he went back and listened to recordings of all the legislative hearings about the issue and none of it made more sense.
He wonders why the amendment is so necessary when the benefits to taxpayers aren’t clear.
He also wonders whether the change will benefit some private people or businesses in a way that has not been disclosed.
Kings said the way the amendment is written it would give lawmakers the ability to tinker with the law later on. So, if Utahns approve the constitutional amendment, it could be changed again after the vote is over.
For those reasons, he will vote “no” on constitutional amendment “C”.