Draper City Truth in Taxation Hearing on Proposed Property Tax Rate Increase - August 12, 2026

The Draper City Council held a Truth in Taxation public hearing on Wednesday, August 12, 2026, at 6:00 PM (called to order at 6:12 PM) in the City Council Chambers. The meeting was solely for public comment on a proposed 25% property tax rate increase for both the Salt Lake County and Utah County portions of the city. No action was taken; the final budget adoption and related public hearing are scheduled for August 18, 2026, at 7:00 PM.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Alberto Delator (13889 Standing Oak Drive): Opposed the increase, calling it overspending and noting that fixed-income residents cannot absorb a 25% hike. He urged the council to cut costs instead of raising taxes.
• Michelle Polish (555 East Tilden Park Lane): Asked about potential future tax reductions, measurable outcomes from the increase (e.g., firefighter fatigue, response times), alternative solutions considered, and whether council members are receiving raises. She questioned the need for increased playground maintenance funding.
• Quinn Horrocks (875 East 138 South): Opposed the increase, arguing that property taxes always rise beyond stated amounts and that the city should find cuts, such as unnecessary snow plowing and coordinated maintenance with Salt Lake County. He noted that the flood tax already generates substantial revenue.
• Ashley Kohler (14094 South Pine Mesa Drive): Opposed, citing inflation, fixed-income residents, and the burden of rising property taxes on homeowners. She questioned the need for additional revenue given new growth and suggested the city scrutinize spending.
• Julie Walton (13496 South 300 East): Opposed, stating that this would be a 45% increase over three years (including a failed attempt last year). She argued the city has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and criticized the lack of town halls and transparency.
• Scott Brown (1797 Ain Tree Avenue): Opposed, saying the presentation lacked justification for the increase. He noted that property taxes are regressive and urged the city to reduce costs.
• Jeff Hanson (12057 South 300 East): Opposed, citing inflation and the burden of multiple tax increases (county, school district, city). He questioned why the budget remains the same with or without the increase and suggested taxing commercial areas more heavily.
• Shauna Fuller (13843 Ranch Circle): Asked about volunteer opportunities to reduce costs, better notification of meetings, and campaigns to promote local shopping. She expressed concern about elderly residents choosing between taxes and food.
• Christian Schenck (14032 Old Saddle Road, online): Strongly opposed, calling the tax regressive. He recommended cutting the $39,000 annual renewal for Flock safety cameras, reducing the $350,000 community events budget, and raising recreation fees instead of raising property taxes.
• Marvin Clough (1459 East Forge Way, online): Supported retaining Flock cameras but suggested a partial increase (half) to ease the burden. He advocated for smaller, more frequent rate increases to avoid large jumps.

Discussion Items

• Presentation by Finance Director John Vike: He presented the proposed tax rate increase from 0.000902 to 0.001128 (certified tax rate after 25% increase). The increase would generate approximately $2,696,000 in additional ad valorem tax revenue: $2,455,712 from Salt Lake County and $122,224 from Utah County. For a primary residence in Salt Lake County (valued at $941,000), the monthly increase would be $9.75 ($116.97 annually); in Utah County (valued at $838,000), $8.68 monthly ($104.17 annually). The funds would offset operational and compensation costs, reduce reliance on fund balance (from $3.3 million drawdown to $5.7 million without the increase), add three firefighters ($165,000 net cost to reduce overtime), and increase playground maintenance ($70,000 to $200,000).
• Mayor’s Closing Remarks: Mayor Walker explained that this is only the second property tax increase in his 18 years of service (the first was a 20% increase two years ago; a 10% increase last year failed due to procedural error). He noted that sales tax growth, which previously funded the budget, has slowed. He emphasized that the city has cut costs where possible, that new growth does not automatically increase property tax revenue due to Utah’s equalization laws, and that the fund balance (rainy day fund) is needed for emergencies (e.g., a $3 million storm damage event). He argued that significant cuts would require reducing public safety personnel. He also addressed specific concerns: the Flock camera system is a small part of the budget, community events are popular, and the municipal court saves money and time. The council acknowledged public input and clarified that the proposed tax revenue is held in escrow until the final vote.

Key Outcomes

• No action was taken at the hearing.
• The council will hold a public hearing and adopt the final budget on August 18, 2026, at 7:00 PM at Draper City Hall.
• The proposed property tax rate increase of 25% remains under consideration; the council will vote on the budget at the August 18 meeting.
• The city encouraged residents to sign up for notifications via the Draper website to receive information about future meetings.