Utah County Commission approves greenbelt relief for 0.78-acre parcel after owner testimony

The Utah County Commission adopted agenda item 5, granting a property-tax greenbelt appeal for a 0.78-acre parcel after hearing testimony from the property owner and a recommendation against relief from the county attorney's office. The commission moved to approve the appellant's request following discussion and clarification that the contested parcel contains a residence.

The owner, identified in the transcript as Bonner, told the commission the two parcels involved have been in the Green Belt for about 45 years and that his home sits on the 0.78-acre lot. Bonner said the land supports irrigation rights (which he stated cost $400 a year), provides hay to a neighboring operation (about 150 tons from adjacent acreage) and serves as a local green space where, he said, “there's a school bus that stops there, and there's about 15 kids that hug the horse when he's in there.” Adam Beck of the Utah County Attorney's Office described the parcel as the 0.78-acre lot with a home and said the attorney's office recommended denial because the parcel was being taxed comparably to similar residential parcels.

Commission discussion focused on how the parcel differs from larger adjacent acreage and whether the tax classification should reflect open land or a residential parcel. One commissioner said, given the parcel’s long history in the Green Belt and the factors presented, they were inclined to approve the appellant's request. Adam Beck reiterated that the contested piece is the smaller parcel with a dwelling, not the larger agricultural holdings to which it is adjacent.

After a motion to adopt agenda item 5 and a second from Commissioner Gardner, the chair called for a voice vote. Multiple commissioners responded “Aye” and the motion carried; the commission adopted agenda item 5. The meeting then proceeded through the remainder of the consent agenda, opened a public comment period during which no one addressed the commission, and adjourned.

The record in the transcript does not provide a full roll-call vote or specify which commissioners cast each yea beyond the chair and Commissioner Gardner saying “Aye.” The county attorney’s recommendation to deny the appeal and the appellant’s testimony in support of relief are both recorded in the meeting minutes.

The commission did not receive additional public testimony on the matter after the hearing and adjourned following a motion to close the meeting.