Heber City Corporation

HEBER CITY CORPORATION 75 North Main Street Heber City, Utah City Council Meeting June 4, 2009

5:00 p.m. Budget Meeting

The Council of Heber City, Wasatch County, Utah, met in Budget Meeting on June 4, 2009, in the City Council Chambers in Heber City, Utah.

Present: Mayor David R. Phillips

Council Members Jeffery Bradshaw Elizabeth Hokanson Eric Straddeck Nile Horner Robert Patterson

Also Present: City Manager Mark K. Anderson City Recorder Paulette Thurber City Engineer Bart Mumford

Anderson distributed documents which he felt addressed the remaining issues to be discussed to finalize the budget. He pointed out the sales tax collection from May and that the number was still down 19 ½% from a year ago.

Anderson indicated that on the Water/Sewer Capital request list, he had taken off service maintainer and reduced the lap top cost from $14,000 to $4,000. He also took off service maintainer tooling in the sewer fund because the service maintainer had been taken off.

He said that with regard to the sander, he had talked with Tozier and he (Tozier) indicated the $40,000 figure was an error. It was felt to fully replace the sander would cost more like $24,000. It was suggested the sander equipment could possibly be rebuilt for $5,000 for steel and materials plus the labor costs. It was felt there might be a few years use, if it was rebuilt. Discussion about sander-was it inoperable-how long would it last if repaired-would it waste sand if repaired-was it used last year-what were the consequences if it was not operational this year. Anderson said two people would have to cover the same area if it was not used.

Mayor Phillips indicated he had talked to Anderson about having Tozier being more definitive with his requests. Anderson said there was $800,000 in the Internal Service Fund and the sander was the only request for those monies this year. He indicated there had been monies set aside over the last few years for things like this. Councilmember Horner asked about a sander at the airport. Anderson said the City did not have a sander at the airport. It was discussed that if the sander was repaired, the Council wanted it to last long enough to pay for the repair. The Council

1 of 5 ccsm06042009 felt it should last five years for the $5,000. The Council decided to purchase a new one for $24,000 or under. However, if the cost was more than $24,000, they wanted to revisit the issue.

Anderson indicated he had invited Don Blackburn to this meeting to talk about fee changes within the fire fee portion of the Fee Schedule. Blackburn explained that prior to his employment with the City, services outside the City had to be obtained in order to get these inspections done. However, since he had started with the City, he was able to do the inspections because he had the certification to do them. He explained these were fees that were already being charged but were paid to outside people because no one in the City employ had the certification to do them. He explained these fees were part of bids by sprinkling companies because they know they had to be paid--these really are not new fees, just fees that were not on the paper schedule. Councilmember Straddeck asked if these fees were representative of the effort it took to do those inspections and indicated he wanted the costs to be covered. Blackburn said, after talking to the Fire Marshal’s Office and other cities, he felt the fees were in line. Anderson asked how many of these types of inspections were done on an annual basis. Blackburn said the more commercial business that located within the City limits, the more of these types of inspections would have to be done. He thought he did about ten last year. Again it was discussed that the fees from these inspections would stay in the City’s budget now that Blackburn was here and had the certifications to do them. Councilmember Horner asked about the acceptance test for one or two family dwellings. Blackburn explained about this test/sprinkling system. He said that anytime a residential home had a sprinkling system in it, this test had to be performed. He indicated that in 2011, all residential homes would have to have fire sprinkling systems. Blackburn talked about the City adopting State and ICC Codes. Councilmember Horner asked about final occupancy inspection. Blackburn said the fee for the final inspection was charged up front on the building permit. Mayor Phillips emphasized again these were really not new fees, (talking about the fire fees) but something that had been done but had not been listed on the fee schedule. He said it was a real plus for the City that Blackburn had these certifications and the monies collected could stay in the City’s budget.

At this time Anderson reviewed each increase within the categories. He indicated the changes to the Administration fee had already been adopted but were now changed on the paper schedule. He reviewed the changes in the Cemetery category which were all new fees. He indicated that, if changed, an additional $9,950 in revenue would be realized (based on last year’s activity). Councilmember Straddeck asked if the current fees were below average and that’s why we were looking at changes, or was it to cover costs? Anderson reviewed the cemetery budget and said we were looking to boost revenue and cover costs. He said we could not match revenue and expenses in the Cemetery budget because of the perpetual care issue and maintaining the ground from when people were buried in the 1800’s. It was indicated that head stone setting fees was a new fee. Anderson indicated he had looked at the Code today and repair of damaged headstones costs was something perpetual care funds could be use for, if four/fifths of the Council agreed to that. Anderson explained the reasoning behind charging more to County residents than City residents was because the Cemetery is subsidized by the General Fund. (“County folks don’t support at the same level as City folks”)

2 of 5 ccsm06042009 Airport – The ground lease amount is reflective of the current rates. The only new fee is the monthly fee to lease the hangars the City has been unable to sell. Mayor Phillips asked for clarification on the length of the lease. Anderson said ideally it would be month to month. Mayor Phillips discussed that when the Advisory Board gave their annual report, it could be done at the airport and Nadim AbuHaider, the FBO, would open the doors and set up some chairs in a hangar and let the Council see right on the site what was being talked about. Anderson said he would talk to the Airport Board and get something scheduled for an update/tour of the facility. Councilmember Horner said he felt it was important that the City was charging a fee that was conducive to selling so the City would not be in a position to have to lease forever. He said he wanted to get those hangars sold. He said he wanted to make it as attractive as possible to get those sold.

Planning Commission – Anderson said the economic effect in this Department depended on the activity there was in the development areas. He said the goal was to do a better job to cover the cost we pay to external engineers as well as to cover some of the cost of staff time. He continued that what Mumford had proposed was higher than Anderson’s final proposal. Councilmember Straddeck asked why. Anderson said he felt the percentage jump was too significant. He suggested that the one fee that would be the most painful to a developer was the increase of final subdivision per lot fee.

Animal Control – The proposal was to go from $20 to $25 (unsprayed/unneutered animals) and $10 to $15 (spayed/ neutered animals) on license fees. Anderson said the Animal Control Board met earlier in the week. He said he and Jeff Bradshaw had attended as well as Mike Davis and Tom Bonner. He felt the Agreement with the County was salvageable. He suggested there was still some work to do, but he felt good about the meeting. He indicated Chief Rhoades was to draft a letter (Anderson would review that) about the Animal Control services to Daniels, Independence and Hideout. He said the letter would ask for their participation in the County- Wide program or not receive services. Anderson indicated the prisoners had been cleaning the Shelter three days a week without compensation. The County indicated that practice could be continued, but the charge to the City would be $250 a week which was $13,000 that had not been built into the budget.

Councilmember Bradshaw said one complaint from the County was not having coverage and the deputies were being called out. He continued that as that was talked about, the County better understood the issues with the City being down to one person in that department. (Interviews to be held next week to replace Neil Clegg) He said that Sheriff Bonner and Chief Rhoades were going to figure out what justified a call out by Animal Control Officers rather than being handled by law enforcement personnel. Councilmember Bradshaw said the other complaint the County had was that people in Wallsburg, Daniels, and Charleston were being ticketed and they had not established fees. This made it difficult for the County Attorney to prosecute. Mayor Phillips felt these were valid complaints. He asked how the Council felt about not servicing these areas if they were not willing to get ordinances in place and work with the rest of the County. Councilmember Bradshaw felt that might give those entities an incentive to get an ordinance in place. Councilmember Straddeck agreed those entities needed to get involved. It was discussed that if the County stopped paying for services in these areas and those entities did not contribute

3 of 5 ccsm06042009 themselves, the City would lose some revenue. However, the City would also reduce their services to those areas.

Franchise Tax – Anderson explained this was something that, when sales tax went off food, the Transportation Sales Tax was increased in order to keep the City revenue neutral.

Water/Sewer – It was indicated construction water fee was a practice that had been in place for several years but was never on the fee schedule. Councilmember Horner asked why not just put a meter in when they got the permit and charge them for their actual usage. It was suggested the $50 fee was a sufficient fee for the use the construction company needed during the building of the home.

Building Department - The Building Department indicated they were charging 20% of the Building Permit Fee (BPF). On the plan review related items it was a 15%.

Anderson suggested, based on information available tonight, he had not heard that the Council did not want to put this Schedule as an exhibit to the budget document. He said he would make the document more presentable and would attach it as an addendum or exhibit to the budget. He said that just showed the fees the City would be charging in the budget year—it is just a schedule of fees.

Councilmember Hokanson arrived at 6:15.

Anderson reviewed the water/sewer sheet. At the last meeting the Council had decided not to raise fees. Those two sheets showed the revenue/expenses based on no increase which also showed more expenses than revenues. Councilmember Straddeck pointed out the $170,000 deficit in sewer and $180,000 in water and said that had to be addressed, if not this year, soon.

Councilmember Straddeck asked about an itemized list of contributions the Council had budgeted. Anderson said he did not have a list but they were:

Cowboy Poetry $30,000 High School Rodeo $10,000 WAEDA $20,000

Last $10,000 over the following requests: Children’s Justice Center ($4,400), Peoples Health Clinic ($2,500), PowWow ($1,500), Concerts in Park ($800), and Special Olympics ($600). The Council discussed possible cuts and prioritizing the benefit of the events to Heber City. The above numbers in parentheses were decided upon.

Councilmember Horner said he was really happy with the fact that Blackburn was helping and being flexible between Departments. He thought the City should look for more of those types of savings. He thought everyone needed to look at ways to save labor costs and money. One thing he wanted to suggest was that Tozier needed to get his CDL license so he could push snow and help out with that type of work, when necessary and if needed. He said the City needed to look at other people in the organization to do as Blackburn was doing. He suggested the Airport

4 of 5 ccsm06042009 Manager could possibly help maintain ditches. He suggested people should not be scared and too department focused, but rather be more flexible. Mayor Phillips suggested Anderson needed to watch and make sure everyone was gainfully employed.

The question was asked if the Council wanted Tozier to get the CDL license. Patterson-yes; Hokanson-mixed emotions-it seemed he worked more than he should already. She suggested she would like to talk to him first about what kind of hours he was putting in, etc. Councilmember Horner said it would only allow him to help with driving the equipment, if necessary. Councilmember Bradshaw said he had no real objections to that as did Councilmember Straddeck. It was suggested there were six months before snow season which gave him plenty of time to get that license.

Councilmember Straddeck asked about Master Plan updates. He wondered where that money was spent. Mumford said the City’s Master Plan was six years old and it had been scheduled to be done on a five-year basis. He indicated that the last time it was done, Horrocks Engineers did some of the work and he (Mumford) did some of the work. He said he couldn’t tell how much of the money budgeted would be spent. He indicated the $200,000 budgeted was an estimate as he had not yet put together a scope of work. Mumford said the focus would be in what work was done in other years and that there was usually enough change that the Master Plan needed to be done every five years. He said he did not have the expertise in some areas and suggested he wanted some input from Councilmember Horner on what he felt the focus should be. Mayor Phillips suggested less be budgeted to give the Council more of a comfort level. Mumford said while development was down was the time to do this. Anderson said there had been change in impact laws that needed to be looked at. Mumford felt it should be less than $200,000 and if the Council wanted to lower that number that was fine. Councilmember Straddeck suggested that because the costs came out of impact fees, if it was something that needed looked at later, that would be O.K. Mumford said this was a great time to do this as building was slow. Councilmember Horner suggested $120,000 which was double what was spent last time. Mumford said he was comfortable with that figure.

As the time was 6:30 p.m., the Budget Meeting was adjourned.

Paulette Thurber, City Recorder

5 of 5 ccsm06042009