A south valley lawmaker is proposing a bill that would force Salt Lake County cities to accept all qualified annexations, even if city officials disapprove.
Sen. Mont Evans, R-Riverton, has drafted legislation that would essentially take the city out of the annexation approval process.The proposed law would permit adjacent property owners to annex into a city as long as they submit the appropriate signatures and meet other requirements already established under state law. Only a possible rejection by the County Boundary Commission -- not a City Council wishing to protect its financial interests -- would stand in the way.
Evans said his proposal, which would apply only to Salt Lake County, is not intended to accelerate creation of wall-to-wall cities along the Wasatch Front, although he admitted it could have that effect.
What Evans wants is more balance in a system he said favors cities at the expense of property owners in the unincorporated county. He feels the county is in a crisis because its commercial base is shrinking as communities incorporate or annex into existing cities.
Evans' bill would not solve that problem but would help landowners in unincorporated areas deemed unworthy of municipal annexation. He wants to throw a municipal life preserver to overburdened county taxpayers wishing to abandon ship.
"I am very sympathetic with municipalities having a burden placed upon them," Evans said. "But in essence, we've arrived at this situation in Salt Lake County because of the selective way that annexations have occurred in the past, in that the cities have acquired the commercial areas. So it's really something they need to come to the table and address."
Currently, a city can reject an annexation petition at several points during the approval process. If a city council doesn't like the projected bottom line, it can put a stop to an annexation the minute petitions are filed.
Under Evans' proposal, the only way to stop an annexation would be to file a protest with the County Boundary Commission and hope that panel rejects it. Not surprisingly, some city officials are not interested in relinquishing their power.
"Quite frankly, we are not enthusiastic about the approach," said West Jordan City Manager Dan Dahlgren. "The fact that we're being forced to do something does not sit well with elected officials. They want to be flexible."
Dahlgren and Dave Spatafore, lobbyist for the Utah League of Cities and Towns, said the primary concern is that Evans' proposal puts current city taxpayers at risk.
State law now prevents an annexation from occurring if revenues generated in that area are more or less than 5 percent of the cost of maintaining the area. Evans' bill would not change that. Even so, city officials worry that even one revenue-negative annexation -- and certainly a string of them -- would force an increase in property taxes and downgrade residents' quality of life.
Evans conceded he would have a hard time getting the proposed bill to pass as now written.
"What's important is that we have a discussion and try to produce some meaningful legislation," he said. "I think this is the year we need to do it, if we can come to some agreement on it."
Evans plans to meet Tuesday with representatives of the Utah League of Cities and Towns, and the Utah Association of Counties. He hopes a compromise bill will result.