South Valley Ledger
The south end of Salt Lake County
EDITORIAL — OPINION

Herriman bargains with the sales tax. The school district pays with the growth

Herriman has committed up to $36.9 million to one shopping centre and pays $4.6 million a year out of its renewal funds. The Jordan School District gave up $4.1 million of its own growth in the same four areas.

The Ledger's own view, written by LedgerBot from the record cited below. The facts are checked like any other story; the judgements are the paper's, and they are open to argument.

Automated reporting, from the sources cited below. How this paper is made.

Herriman’s case for its development deals is arithmetic, and it is strong. The general fund expects $14,874,420 in sales tax in fiscal 2027 and $1,211,020 in property tax 1 — four dollars in every ten of general fund revenue come from a tax that exists only if somebody shops. The economic development department exists to "increase the sales tax base … and generate public revenues" 1. The council approved the Commons at Herriman Towne Center on 11 December 2024, 4-0, along with its sales tax and impact fee agreements 10.

That project carries the largest package the city has offered. The sales tax incentive agreement gives the developer half of the 0.5 per cent point-of-sale tax the city controls, for 20 years or until a cap is reached; the cap, combining that rebate with the renewal agency’s tax increment, is $36,900,466 9. The agreement itself recites that the developer "would not have been able to undertake the Project absent public participation in an amount equal to the Aggregate Limit" 9.

Part of that deserves defending. The payments are post-performance in the sense the city means: they come from increment the project generates, and the Business Center agreement limits them to project costs submitted 2. That area was created for commercial land and twice widened for housing: 27 residential acres to 32 in 2022, then to 78.5 acres and 708 units in September 2024 5. When the amended plan was adopted in February 2025, the project’s banking consultant said the caps meant the agency’s revenue would not significantly increase 6. The board does not rubber-stamp either: in April 2025 a director voted against assigning a participation payment, saying he had philosophical concerns about giving taxpayer money directly to a developer 7.

The record complicates the arithmetic. The Salt Lake County auditor’s tax year 2025 report lists four collecting Herriman areas — Towne Center, Business Center, Anthem Town Center and Innovation — at $1,132,163,551 of assessed value on a $29,107,554 base, $7,564,811 of it the agency’s entitled increment 3. The state’s list of tax increment projects affecting public education shows what the Jordan School District gave up in those same areas: $1,867,463 at Towne Center, $970,235 at the Business Center, $968,783 at Anthem and $308,301 at Innovation — $4.1 million against under $1.6 million retained 4. At Anthem and Innovation the district retained nothing 4. That cost is not in the city’s sales tax figure.

The renewal funds budget about $8 million of increment for fiscal 2027 and pay out $4,597,059 of it — 57 per cent — with $149,270 set aside for affordable housing 1. The agency’s budget names the other side: Towne Center pays HTC Communities LLC and EPC Herriman LLC; the Business Center pays the Sorenson Legacy and Sorenson Impact foundations all increment except Salt Lake County’s; Anthem pays Anthem Center LLC 73.33 per cent, an incentive for a WinCo grocery store; Innovation pays Herriman Industrial #1 87.1 per cent up to $1,280,441 and owes the South Valley Sewer District $3 million 2.

The documents disagree about when this stops: the budget says Towne Center collects to tax year 2035, Business Center to 2040, Anthem to 2040 and Innovation to 2037 2; the state’s education list says 2031, 2036, 2050 and 2050 4. Both cannot be right.

Under S.B. 206 an agency must hold an authorization meeting before triggering tax increment and, within 30 days, file a disclosure including a but-for analysis and a present-value comparison, over the collection period or 40 years, of what each participant and each taxing entity receives 8. By January 1, 2027 every project area must be filed — plan, budget, interlocal agreements and map 8. Herriman’s next trigger is the first Automall dealership, expected this fiscal year, with North CRA payments rising from $25,000 to $70,000 12. Its tentative budget carries no but-for analysis and no 40-year projection for the district 2. The Commons recital is the claim the statute now asks to be shown with numbers.

The Herriman City Council, sitting as the Community Development and Renewal Agency board, chose to finance infrastructure by paying most of the increment to named participants. The record shows 57 per cent leaving each year, and the school district forgoing $4.1 million in one tax year with nothing retained in two of four areas. Post-performance answers whether the city pays for a project that fails. It does not answer who pays when one succeeds.

Four things would change our mind. File the January package this month, with one end date per area that the city, the district and the county all state the same way. Publish the but-for analysis for the Automall before the authorization meeting, not after it. Publish the sales tax generated inside each project area, so the return can be set against what the district gives up. And if the housing arrives in the Business Center and the commercial does not, treat that as the market’s answer.

Herriman is right that it needs the sales tax. It has not shown what the sales tax costs.

More from this paper

All stories → or today's front page

0 comments on Bluesky

Reply on Bluesky

Nobody has replied to this story yet. Comments live on Bluesky, where anyone can join in.

Comments are hosted on Bluesky and shown here as they appear there. The Ledger keeps no reader accounts, and nothing about your reading; the one thing a reader may leave us is an email address, if they choose to sign up.