Did You Know?
In the past two years, the current Salt Lake City Council has voted against the interests of the people. Several notable examples are listed below.
1. Gave your hard-earned money to a billionaire
The Salt Lake City Council voted unanimously to increase sales tax for the next 30 years. Of the $900 million that will go to Smith Entertainment Group (owned by Provo billionaire Ryan Smith), $525 million will go toward renovating the Delta Center. The city will receive no share of the ownership or profits from this handout.
Looking at the numbers, the best case scenario is that Salt Lake City will give away $900 million and get $450 million back. (to see how that is calculated, scroll to the bottom of the page)
With this vote, the Council has decided to give nearly one in every three sales tax dollars the city collects to a billionaire who doesn’t live in the county. This is essentially a Reverse Robin Hood situation — taking from the working-class and giving to the ultra-wealthy.
2. Made it more difficult for you to interact with them
Last year, the Council voted unanimously to cut the general public comment period to only one hour. They denied the public the opportunity to speak on this change before the vote.
According to Aaron Terr of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, “Eliminating or severely limiting opportunities for public comment shows a disregard for democratic values, especially if it's done in response to criticism of government officials.”
When questioned by the Salt Lake Tribune, the current representative of SLC District 1 justified the decision to add this barrier to public comment, saying they did it “because we can.”
3. Increased their pay significantly
In 2024, the Council voted to skyrocket Mayor Mendenhall’s salary from $168,067 to $211,764. This single-year pay increase was roughly the same as Salt Lake City’s per capita income.
Current ordinance requires that the Mayor make quadruple what the Councilmembers make. The Council could have voted to amend or remove this ordinance, but chose not to.
While the Council gifted themselves and the Mayor a 26% increase, they only gave city employees a 5% raise.
We Deserve Better
As long as I can remember, the Westside has been known for its multi-generational families and rich cultural diversity. Unless we embrace housing solutions (such as Limited Equity Cooperative Housing and Land Trusts), our neighborhoods will no longer have a place for working-class people. However, if we demand these and other solutions, our neighborhoods will truly be ours, and they will continue to be a welcoming environment to our future neighbors.
I am fighting with you, my neighbors, to create a stronger Westside. It is time to end the status quo — we need a representative who will work to make our city work for the people. This is why I am asking for your vote on November 4.
The best-case scenario with Smith Entertainment Group
The Salt Lake City Council voted to give $900 million of your tax dollars to Smith Entertainment Group, owned by billionaire Ryan Smith. At most, we can expect to get half of this back, over a thirty year period
The new development is expected to create new growth of value of $3 billion. With a general property tax rate of .015388%, that will generate $46,164,000 per year. Salt Lake City can expect to get 20–25% of the total property tax collected, which changes based on taxing districts. This would result in the city getting between $9,232,800 and $11,541,000 annually. Over 30 years, that would result in between $276,984,000 and $346,230,000.
Additionally, tickets sold at the Delta Center will now include a $1–3 fee, and over the course of 30 years, this could bring in $100 million. Combined with the high end of the property tax value, this would bring the total the city gets back to $446,230,000, or about half of what is given to the project. It is worth mentioning, Smith Entertainment Group gives nothing back. The tax they will pay is the same property tax we all pay, and the money raised by the ticket fee is paid by those attending the games and events — it is not part of their revenue.
While some will argue that spending in the area will go up due to the renovations, it is unlikely. Most people have a budget of what they can spend on entertainment, so if new developments come, they won’t spend more. They will stop spending on one item to shift to another, leading to the same amount of money being spent on entertainment in the local economy.
Advocates for subsidized sports venues often claim increased revenues to nearby businesses justify the expense. This is more of a feeling than an economic reality. This has been studied in other cities and these returns on subsidized sports venues just do not materialize. Here is one of many studies that shed light on the reality behind these claims.