Susan Lee for Davis County Commissioner: A Plan to Cut Spending and Protect Taxpayers

Join Utah State Senator John D. Johnson on the Politicit Podcast for an in-depth conversation with Susan Lee, Republican candidate for Davis County Commissioner (Seat B). In this episode, Sen. Johnson and Susan Lee discuss key local issues facing Davis County, including cutting government waste, promoting common-sense policies, economic growth, infrastructure, and protecting taxpayer dollars from bloated bureaucracy and her number one issue, property taxes. Susan shares her vision for responsible leadership, fiscal conservatism, and putting residents first in one of Utah’s fastest-growing areas. Whether you’re a Davis County voter or interested in Utah Republican politics, this interview provides candid insights into the future of local governance.

Susan Lee is running for Davis County Commissioner with a message centered on fiscal responsibility, respect for taxpayers, and practical local government. Her campaign grew out of a direct reaction to recent county decisions that will affect household budgets across the county—most critically a proposed 30 percent property tax increase and ongoing spending commitments made with one-time revenue.

PoliticIt Radio – Steady Hands for Davis County

Why this campaign matters now

Davis County is changing fast. It is one of Utah’s fastest-growing areas, and the demographic makeup is shifting, with the senior population expanding rapidly. Growth brings opportunity, but it also brings challenges for county budgets and for residents on fixed incomes who face rising property taxes and higher costs of living.

Lee’s entry into the race was driven by a single alert: a large tax increase on the horizon. That spike in the property tax rate was a red flag—prompting a deep dive into county finances. What she found convinced her that voters deserve a different approach to budgeting and governance at the county level.

Reading the numbers: spending has outpaced growth

When a candidate with an accounting background looks at public finances, she looks for sustainability. Lee points to a striking metric: since 2017 the county’s rate of spending has grown faster than the county’s rate of growth by more than 50 percent. That gap matters because it indicates a structural mismatch between recurring revenue and recurring obligations.

Why is that a problem? Governments, like households and businesses, must match ongoing expenses with ongoing revenue. If recurring spending rises faster than long-term revenue, the gap is often bridged with tax increases or by drawing down reserves. Either path eventually leads to pain for taxpayers.

One-time COVID funds and the “permanentization” trap

The federal COVID relief packages injected substantial one-time funds into local governments. Those dollars were intended to address an emergency, not to create permanent staffing or ongoing programs. Lee observed—and documented in public meetings—that Davis County used portions of those one-time funds to fund permanent positions and long-term commitments.

That approach created a structural problem. When the one-time funds were gone, so was the fiscal cover for the jobs and programs they had funded. Elected leaders were then left with a choice: either cut those ongoing expenses or raise taxes to pay for them. In Davis County, the commissioners chose the latter, prompting calls for smarter budgeting practices that distinguish clearly between one-time and ongoing expenditures.

Who pays for poor fiscal decisions? Seniors and fixed-income households

The human side of this debate is easy to overlook when officials talk in percentages, but it is real and tangible. Many Davis County residents are older adults who live on fixed incomes. Their largest asset is often their home, and rising property taxes can force life-changing decisions—selling a home, moving out of the community, or cutting essential services.

Lee shared a vivid example from her own family. Her 90-year-old father, a former school teacher, told her he might have to disconnect his Dish Network service to balance his budget after taxes rose. That anecdote captures how policy choices translate into daily sacrifices for seniors and low-income families.

Policy options to protect seniors

There are established policy tools that counties and states can use to ease the burden on seniors. Options include:

• Property tax freezes that lock a homeowner’s property tax at a rate when they reach a certain age or enter retirement.
• Circuit breakers that provide credits to lower property taxes for households whose tax burden exceeds a percentage of income.
• Targeted exemptions that reduce or cap certain portions of the tax bill for qualifying seniors.

Lee argues that Davis County needs to consider these kinds of options to keep long-time residents in their homes and to avoid pricing people out of the community they helped build.

The politics of timing: taxes up, pay up

One moment that crystallized Lee’s critique of county leadership came shortly after the commission approved a tax increase. Within a week, the commission also voted to raise their own pay. That sequence undermined public trust and raised questions about priorities.

Lee points out that leaders should not expect residents to accept new burdens while officials increase their compensation. Public service requires sacrifices and accountability; optics and timing matter when elected officials make financial decisions that affect themselves and the people they serve.

Responsibility, accountability, and a business perspective

Lee frames much of her argument through the lens of her experience as a business owner and accountant. She and her husband operated a trucking company across 13 western states. That experience required strict budgeting, careful payroll management, and a discipline to match labor costs to revenue streams. Those same skills, she argues, are directly applicable to county government.

Her core promise is simple and focused. As she put it:

“to listen, to be accountable, and to always put the people of Davis County first.”

That pledge is accompanied by practical commitments to bring back fiscal responsibility, to cut spending where necessary, and to reduce taxes.

What business experience brings to public service

Running a private business forces clear decisions about what is affordable and what is not. It means:

• Prioritizing expenditures that generate clear benefits.
• Measuring performance and cutting unproductive activities.
• Keeping payroll in line with sustainable revenue.
• Making long-term commitments only when funding sources are secure.

Lee wants to apply these disciplines to county budgeting—particularly the discipline of not using temporary revenue to fund permanent needs.

Examples of prudent local decision-making: the Kayesville fiber fight

Not every growth-related project needs a municipal bond or public financing. Lee cites a local example where she opposed a proposed $35 million bond to build fiber infrastructure in a small city. The council and mayor supported the bond, but residents ultimately voted it down. Private companies later stepped in and built fiber service without burdening taxpayers with a massive bond.

This episode illustrates a broader principle: before turning to public debt or taxpayer-funded projects, officials should consider whether the private sector can deliver the same service more efficiently. When private enterprise can meet demand without public financing, taxpayers should not be compelled to underwrite competitors or take on unnecessary debt.

Specific tactics to curb county spending

Lee offers several practical approaches to control spending and restore fiscal balance. These include:

1. Audit and review—Conduct a thorough audit of county departments to identify redundant positions, unnecessary programs, and recurring costs funded by one-time revenue.
2. Freeze new hiring—Temporarily pause nonessential hiring until the budget is realigned with recurring revenue.
3. Sunset clauses—Attach automatic review deadlines to new programs or positions funded by one-time funds, ensuring they do not become permanent without voter approval or a clear revenue stream.
4. Benchmarking compensation—Regularly compare county pay scales to neighboring counties and the private sector to avoid unsustainable salary growth.
5. Line-item transparency—Publish clear, accessible budget documents to let citizens see where every dollar goes.
6. Citizen oversight—Establish a citizen fiscal council or advisory board to review big spending decisions and recommend priorities.

These steps aim to reduce waste and restore public confidence by making the budget process more transparent and accountable.

Revenue choices: property tax versus sales tax

When governments need revenue, they have choices—and every option affects different groups in different ways. Property taxes fall heavily on homeowners and can be particularly painful for seniors and people on fixed incomes. Sales taxes are more broadly distributed among consumers, but they can be regressive too, hitting lower-income households harder as a share of income.

Some states have experimented with alternative models. For example, policies that freeze property taxes for older residents preserve homeownership for seniors. Others shift revenue reliance to sales taxes while exempting basic necessities like groceries to reduce regressive impacts.

Lee argues that Davis County must rethink tax policy, weigh distributional impacts, and consider targeted exemptions or freezes to protect vulnerable residents.

Why structural budgeting matters: avoid recurring obligations from temporary windfalls

Making permanent commitments with temporary revenue is a common pitfall. It creates a structural deficit as soon as the one-time funds are spent. The responsible course of action is to reserve one-time revenues for capital investments or short-term programs that will end when the money runs out. If permanent programs are desired, they should be funded from stable, recurring revenue or approved by the electorate.

Examples of prudent use of one-time funds include:

• Capital repairs or infrastructure that produce long-term value but are financed explicitly as one-off capital expenditures.
• Emergency relief for residents or short-term public health measures tied directly to the crisis at hand.
• Seed grants with clear sunset clauses and performance metrics, not open-ended staffing commitments.

Lee emphasizes that this philosophy must guide future decisions to prevent the recurrence of tax hikes driven by the expiration of temporary funds.

Public trust and the temperament of leadership

Fiscal policy is technical, but it is also moral. Decisions about spending and taxes reflect values—about who benefits from public dollars and who bears the burden. Lee contends that leaders must demonstrate prudence and humility when making decisions that affect household budgets.

Three behavior principles she promotes are:

• Listen—Engage residents and stakeholders before proposing major fiscal changes.
• Be accountable—Explain choices clearly and accept responsibility for outcomes.
• Put people first—Prioritize policies that protect vulnerable residents and maintain essential services without imposing undue burdens.

By committing to these principles, a commissioner can rebuild trust and make more sustainable policy choices.

What county commissioners actually do

It helps to clarify the role of the county commission. County commissioners oversee county-wide services such as:

• Public health and emergency services
• Infrastructure maintenance and capital projects
• Land use, zoning, and planning
• Budgeting and fiscal policy for county departments
• Coordination with cities, school districts, and the state

Their choices have direct effects on local taxes, service levels, and long-term financial health. Electing commissioners who understand budgeting, prioritize sustainable spending, and engage in transparent decision-making matters for everyday residents.

Practical next steps Lee proposes as commissioner

Lee’s agenda includes several specific commitments designed to restore fiscal balance and protect taxpayers:

• Immediate budget review—A full audit of county spending to identify one-time-funded permanent expenses, redundant positions, and nonessential programs.
• Spending cuts where justified—Eliminate or restructure programs that do not deliver measurable benefits or duplicate private-sector services.
• Tax relief strategies—Explore property tax relief options for seniors, and review the balance between property and sales taxes to protect low- and fixed-income households.
• Transparency and public engagement—Open-access budget reports and town-hall style hearings before major fiscal decisions.
• Responsible compensation policy—Ensure commissioner and staff compensation is reasonable, justified, and aligned with neighboring counties and fiscal capacity.

These steps are grounded in her business background and experience on a city council where she successfully fought to avoid unnecessary public borrowing for private-sector activities.

When private enterprise is the better path

One of the recurring themes in Lee’s remarks is the need to avoid government overreach into arenas where the private sector can serve residents efficiently. The fiber bond example demonstrates that public financing is not always the best or necessary solution. Governments should partner with the private sector when doing so protects taxpayers and delivers outcomes without new public debt.

Where public involvement is necessary—such as in infrastructure that private markets will not provide—officials must ensure the financing is transparent, affordable, and aligned with long-term revenue projections.

Making the argument to voters: stewardship over ideology

Lee’s pitch is less about partisan labels and more about stewardship. She frames the debate as one of fiduciary duty: elected officials manage public resources; mismanagement leads to hardship for ordinary people. Campaign rhetoric matters less than measurable stewardship—balancing budgets, protecting the vulnerable, and preserving choices for future generations.

That approach can appeal to a broad swath of voters who want competent governance over grandstanding policies. It invites cooperation and common-sense decision-making rather than polarization.

Community engagement and upcoming events

Engagement is a central part of Lee’s approach. She has been active in party and civic events and helped organize a local Lincoln Day dinner featuring speakers, a silent auction with more than 50 items, candidate booths for one-on-one conversations, and a unique live auction where residents can bid on dinners with state legislators and senators. Speakers scheduled to appear include Senator Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz, along with remarks from the local congressman and the state attorney general. The event is an opportunity to meet candidates, ask questions, and participate in community fundraising.

How to evaluate candidates for county office

When evaluating candidates for roles like county commissioner, voters should look beyond slogans and assess the following:

• Technical competence—Does the candidate demonstrate a clear understanding of budgeting, revenue streams, and fiscal constraints?
• Track record—Has the candidate shown responsible decision-making in past public service or private-sector roles?
• Policy specificity—Are there clear, realistic policy proposals rather than vague promises?
• Transparency—Will the candidate commit to open budgeting and public engagement?
• Respect for taxpayers—Does the candidate prioritize protecting vulnerable residents and avoiding unnecessary tax burdens?

Lee’s campaign emphasizes these attributes. Her accounting background, experience running a business, and prior service on a city council form the basis of her claim to be a steward of taxpayer dollars.

Common objections and responses

There are predictable counterarguments to a fiscally conservative platform. Lee anticipates and addresses several of them:

• Objection: Cutting spending will harm services. Response: Cuts should be surgical, focused on redundant programs and nonessential positions. Essential services must be preserved, while efficiency initiatives can often improve outcomes without higher costs.
• Objection: Temporary funds should be used wherever needed. Response: One-time funds should be used for one-time needs. Funding permanent obligations with temporary cash creates future shortfalls and forces tax increases later.
• Objection: Private sector can’t be relied on for important infrastructure. Response: Private firms often invest where the business case is clear. Public financing should be reserved for projects that produce public goods otherwise unserved; when the private sector can meet demand, taxpayers should not be burdened unnecessarily.

Practical budget tools county leaders should use

Lee supports several practical budgeting tools that can improve fiscal outcomes:

• Zero-based budgeting—Require departments to justify their budget from zero each cycle, rather than using last year’s budget as the baseline.
• Performance metrics—Tie program funding to measurable outcomes and phase out programs that do not meet targets.
• Reserve policies—Maintain prudent rainy-day funds and define strict conditions for their use.
• Independent audits—Regular third-party audits to ensure accuracy and identify inefficiencies.
• Multi-year forecasting—Project revenues and obligations over several years to avoid mid-cycle surprises and structural deficits.

Restoring trust: transparency and communication

Budget decisions become less controversial when they are explained with candor. Lee advocates for straightforward communication: clear presentations of the trade-offs, public hearings before major tax changes, and easily accessible budget documents that citizens can review without expert help.

When officials explain what they are doing and why, alongside the alternatives and consequences, voters can make informed choices—and elected leaders must be held accountable at the ballot box.

Putting the promise into practice

Lee’s stated priorities—listen, be accountable, and put the people of Davis County first—are the foundation for concrete policies she would push as commissioner:

• Reassess and rebalance the budget to avoid long-term obligations funded by one-time revenue.
• Implement protections for seniors and other vulnerable groups facing rising property taxes.
• Introduce stronger transparency measures and independent audits to ensure the public can track spending.
• Limit the county’s forays into commercial activity where private enterprise can serve residents without public subsidies.

What success looks like

Success under this approach would be measurable and tangible:

• No unexpected, large tax increases driven by structural budget gaps.
• Stable or reduced property tax burdens for seniors and fixed-income households.
• Clear audit trails and accessible budget documents for citizens.
• Prioritized spending that protects essential services and eliminates wasteful duplication.
• Public confidence restored in county governance.

Conclusion

Davis County faces critical choices about how to grow and how to pay for services. The recent pattern of spending increases outpacing growth and the conversion of one-time funds into permanent obligations has put upward pressure on taxes at a time when many residents can least absorb it.

Susan Lee’s campaign presents a practical, experience-based alternative: treat county budgets like businesses, protect vulnerable residents, be transparent, and avoid using temporary windfalls to fund long-term obligations. Her promise—”to listen, to be accountable, and to always put the people of Davis County first”—is a framework for restoring fiscal discipline and making government more responsive.

For voters who prioritize competent stewardship of public dollars, sensible tax policy, and protections for seniors and fixed-income households, fiscal responsibility will be the yardstick by which they evaluate the next county commission. Electing commissioners with proven financial discipline and a commitment to transparency will shape the county’s fiscal health for years to come.

Meetings and participation

Civic engagement matters. Attend candidate events, ask for detailed budget proposals, and seek commitments to independent audits and transparent reporting. Local elections have immediate, practical consequences. Investing time to understand candidates and their fiscal plans can protect household budgets and preserve the long-term health of the community.

Subscribe to PoliticIt for more unfiltered discussions on Utah politics, elections, and conservative leadership! Hosted by Utah Senator John D. Johnson.

#politicit #utahelections #utpol