Before I get into the meat of what I want to write about today, I just need to make everyone aware that staff at the League contacted me about yesterday’s post on likely bills to come up in the 2026 legislative session.  They asked me to make it clear(er) that on the topics of engineering standards and DADUs, no agreements have yet been reached about the content of those potential bills, that things are still in active negotiation.

Okay, now on to today’s topic.

This week the Office of the Legislative Auditor General released a report titled High-Risk List: Identifying and Mitigating Critical Vulnerabilities in Utah – 2025.  The report, as it says, is a list of things that the office has identified as being particularly critical issues for government in Utah to address. Among the 10 items listed in the 2025 report are water (#1), water infrastructure (#2), effective transportation (#5), and housing affordability (#7).

So just what is the purpose of this report?  Here’s a blurb from the report itself:

For several years, the U.S. Government’s Government Accountability Office (GAO) has produced a biennial list of high-risk programs of government operations that highlight vulnerabilities at the federal level. As requested by the Legislative Audit Subcommittee, our office released a similar list in 2023. This report provides an update on the progress made in the areas we identified in 2023.

In the 2023 General Session, the Legislature codified the High-Risk List as part of OLAG’s regular duties. We report to the Audit Subcommittee a list of high-risk programs and operations that threaten public funds or programs; are vulnerable to inefficiency, waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement; or require transformation.

There’s lots in this report that applies to what planners work on at the state and local government levels, and thus is or should be of keen interest.

In an interview with Fox 13 News, Auditor General Kade Minchey said,

“The word I’ve been using is vitality. If we don’t do these things the state will suffer in some form or fashion. We need to work on these things.”

So here are some of the interesting snippets from the report.

Priority 5 has the title of Effective Transportation in Utah Relies on Strategic Land Use and Funding Decisions.  The report says,

Although transportation is a new addition to the High-Risk List for 2025, effective transportation has always been foundational to maintaining Utah’s strong economy and high quality of life.  This is because congestion and lack of mobility negatively impact business and personal lives by increasing costs, limiting people’s access to opportunities, and reducing the desirability of investing and living in Utah.

What I found significant was how the authors of the study recognized the link between land use and transportation.  Section 5.1 of the study is titled, Strategic Land Development Is Needed to Maintain an Effective Transportation System.

…one of the biggest challenges in transit planning is its strong connection to land use.  Specifically, there is an opportunity to facilitate development in urban centers and transit hubs so that transit and active transportation are viable options for more Utah residents.

The report recognizes the significance of the Utah Unified Transportation Plan, and the critical need for all levels of government to do their part.

Utah’s transportation plans identify issues and prescribe possible solutions. As such, we rate Utah’s Transportation Action Plan status as Met. However, as one transportation leader clarified, “the risk is that we don’t implement the plans.” Utah’s capacity to implement these plans relies on funding availability and allocation, as well as local government land use and funding decisions.

Indeed, the next section of the report carries the title, Implementation of Strategic Land Use Planning Relies on Municipalities.  It says,

Although UDOT and UTA execute aspects of Utah’s transportation plans, critical elements related to land use planning are executed by local governments. Utah Code25 grants municipalities and counties broad authority to enact ordinances, resolutions, rules and other forms of land use controls for the use and development of land. Local governments are therefore responsible for adopting and implementing zoning rules and ordinances that support development strategies outlined in Utah’s transportation plans.

The report then inserts a clip from the Utah Housing Policy Performance Audit, that the office did a couple of years ago, saying,

“However, if a city’s residents and leaders oppose housing growth, or if they want only single-family detached homes—a recipe for trouble as Utah continues to grow—the city’s elected leaders can use their statutory powers to stifle housing construction, essentially pushing the problem to its neighboring governments.”

Unfortunately, it is difficult to make comprehensive statements about Utah cities and counties because of the different approaches they take toward land use management.

Transportation leaders identified several common barriers: • Public concerns about impacts from growth. • Some developers prefer development in greenfields because of simplicity and lower upfront costs. • Many local governments do not have the time or resources to update their rules to proactively facilitate strategic land use.

Like I said earlier, the report is a pretty frank assessment of land use processes in the state.

The report does note progress that has been made, and has some recommendations:

Providing transportation choices are core to the Wasatch Choice Vision and Utah’s Unified Transportation Plan. Figure 5.3 below shows the extent of housing growth near high-capacity transportation infrastructure34 in the two regional planning areas along the Wasatch Front. Data shows that communities in the WFRC region—which are mostly those in Salt Lake and Davis counties— are beginning to favor infill development over greenfield development. Communities in the MAG region—which are mostly those in Utah county—still favor greenfield development.

State, regional, and local stakeholders have also worked together to develop and authorize meaningful tools and policy changes over the past few years to promote the connection between land use and transportation. These include station area planning, housing and transit reinvestment zones, first home reinvestment zones, pedestrian and bicycle safety amendments, and other efforts.

Priority item 7 starts of this way: Despite Recent Efforts, a Lack of Affordable Housing Negatively Impacts Quality of Life and State Economic Growth.

This part of the report notes the issues we’ve talked about for some time now about housing and what the problems are.  The report pulls no punches in what it sees as the way things should go:

Much of the housing capacity in current local general plans comes from building more low-density, single-family detached homes. Although increasing housing supply in all areas is critical, denser communities with multiple transportation options and smaller homes can alleviate transportation challenges and increase affordability.

Much of this section emphasizes information and recommendations from the Housing Audit, including these:

Legislature should consider options to increase zoning density on a wide scale within the state.

The Legislature should consider policy options to craft additional penalties and incentives associated with housing planning and targets to better ensure local government compliance.

There’s plenty of interesting stuff to pour over in this report, keeping in mind these are recommendations to the legislature for actions they should consider.  And I haven’t even touched on the water or power portions of the report.