The Snyderville Basin Cemetery District board agreed on next steps for its cemetery business plan, budgeting and property work, saying the district’s finance-administration subcommittee will interview the single respondent to a recent request for qualifications and bring a recommendation to the full board at the next meeting. The board also voted to go into a closed session to discuss a possible real estate acquisition.

District board members discussed the procurement process after the state purchasing office returned guidance that the district may close the solicitation, interview the lone respondent and then document the evaluation and contracting process. Dan, a board member, identified the sole submission as Sloan Consulting and said the district may interview that firm and, if agreeable, bring a contract recommendation to the next meeting.

The discussion matters because the consultant contract is intended to produce a cemetery business plan that will guide site design, services and the district’s early operations. Board members also reviewed and adjusted draft budget numbers and calendar tasks, including scheduling a tentative budget vote and a public hearing required by state practice.

Dan said the state purchasing office told the district it must document the procurement process to guard against favoritism and to show the evaluation steps taken if a contract is awarded. The board agreed that the finance-administration subcommittee — identified in the meeting as the members who handle finance matters — would meet the consultant, discuss scope and return a recommendation. No formal dollar amount was finalized in the meeting for contract authorization; board members discussed authorizing a contract “not to exceed” an amount at the next meeting once terms are negotiated.

On budgeting, board members reviewed a draft that separates operating and capital budgets. The draft that Dan presented assumed a carryover figure of about $450,000 for the current year (based on a working assumption of roughly $45,000 in spending through December) and a property‑tax revenue figure cited as about $495,000 for the next fiscal year. The board discussed reserves, the split between operations and capital, and items to budget in the near term: a cemetery business-plan consultant (Dan said he was assuming $20,000 total, split $10,000 this year and $10,000 next), survey/design/engineering (a $50,000 placeholder), marketing and communications ($25,000), and an administrative assistant (estimates discussed around $20,000–$25,000). Board members and the district’s counsel also discussed likely audit/accounting costs (one estimate for an audit was $8,000–$10,000) and legal support, for which the board agreed to budget more conservatively (one suggestion was $50,000).

Ryan, the district’s county attorney, advised that when the board next approves a tentative budget it should also schedule the statutorily required public hearing and coordinate formats with the state auditor’s office so the operating and capital budgets are presented in the way the auditor expects. Ryan also reminded the board that the district will need to document any contract award in the procurement record.

Board members discussed timing for site permitting and construction. Several speakers cautioned that even an optimistic schedule could push actual construction into late 2026; the conditional‑use/land‑use approvals and stakeholder coordination (including nearby property owners and municipal entities such as Heber City) could take several months. Dan suggested a phased approach and said some early work — market analysis and preliminary design — could start if the consultant begins work in November or January, but he also said it would be reasonable to start most construction activity later depending on permitting outcomes.

The board voted to go into a closed session to discuss possible real‑estate acquisition related to the cemetery project. The roll call for that motion recorded Will, Bill, Dan and Matt as voting yes. The meeting also approved the draft minutes of the Sept. 5 meeting and later adjourned by unanimous voice vote.

The board set next steps for the November meeting: the finance-administration subcommittee will interview the consultant; the district will aim to schedule a tentative budget vote and a public hearing date; the board will invite a representative from the state auditor’s office to consult on budget forms; and the board plans to include Open Meetings/OTMA training on the next agenda.

The meeting record shows explicit distinctions between discussion (budget assumptions, procurement options, possible presales for plots), direction (subcommittee to interview the consultant and return a recommendation), and formal action (approval of minutes, vote to enter a closed session, and adjournment). The board did not finalize or sign any consultant contract at this meeting.