342 P.3d 262
Utah2014Background
- Draper City created the Traverse Ridge Special Service District (District) to provide services funded by property taxes; voters in 2001 authorized the City to "annually levy and collect taxes" for the District up to a 10-mill rate.
- On June 24, 2014, Draper City Council, acting as the District board, adopted Resolution No. TRSSD 14-02 establishing the District’s 2014 property tax (equalized property tax rate).
- Five District residents gathered verified signatures seeking a referendum to refer Resolution TRSSD 14-02 to District voters; Draper City refused to certify the petition.
- The City reasoned the action was an administrative (nonreferable) matter and argued the subjurisdictional referendum statute (allowing only District residents to vote) was unconstitutional and would disenfranchise other Draper residents.
- Petitioners brought an original petition for extraordinary relief in the Utah Supreme Court asking the Court to order the City to certify the referendum petition. The Court granted relief and issued this opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Resolution TRSSD 14-02 is referable | Petitioners: The Resolution levies a tax and thus is legislative and referable | City: The Resolution is administrative (implementing an existing levy), not legislative | Court: Levies of property tax are legislative and referable |
| Whether a tax levy must be an increase to be a "levy" | Petitioners: Annual adoption of a tax rate constitutes a levy regardless of increase | City: A "levy" requires a tax increase triggering Truth-in-Taxation notice | Court: Annual adoption/reporting of a tax rate is a levy even if not an increase |
| Constitutionality of subjurisdictional referendum statute (Utah Code §20A-7-601(3)) | Petitioners: Statute validly delegates referendum power to subjurisdiction voters | City: Statute unconstitutionally limits who in Draper may vote on the issue | Court: Statute constitutional; Legislature may delegate referendum power to subjurisdictions |
| Whether limiting the vote to District residents disenfranchises other city residents | Petitioners: Only District property owners are directly affected by the tax | City: Non-District residents may be financially impacted and thus should vote | Court: No disenfranchisement—only District property owners are directly taxed; City-wide responses remain subject to council action and further referenda if needed |
Key Cases Cited
- Krejci v. City of Saratoga Springs, 322 P.3d 662 (Utah 2013) (discussing people’s legislative power and referendum standards)
- Proulx v. Salt Lake City Recorder, 297 P.3d 573 (Utah 2013) (procedural standards for original writs and referendum review)
- Mouty v. Sandy City Recorder, 122 P.3d 521 (Utah 2005) (ordinances and zoning amendments as legislative acts referable by voters)
- Carter v. Lehi City, 269 P.3d 141 (Utah 2012) (framework for determining when actions are legislative: general applicability and policy weighing)