The Springdale Town Council voted Sept. 10 not to begin the town’s formal business‑license revocation process for Zion Outfitters, the long‑time outfitter at 7 Zion Park Boulevard, unless new information emerges. The decision follows public testimony, letters submitted to the town and a packet that included a forensic accounting affidavit and court records related to owner Philip Heaton’s federal tax case. "We value the town and we value the time that we've had here," said Nathan Crane, an attorney who appeared for Zion Outfitters. Councilmember Kyla Topham moved to forego the revocation process "unless we receive new information," a motion the council approved by roll call. The motion does not prevent the council from reopening the matter should additional, material evidence arise. Why it matters: The hearing could have launched a formal administrative process that would have led to an evidentiary hearing and possible revocation of the outfitter’s permit; instead the council chose a more restrained, discretionary approach after hearing that town staff and an accountant believed the town had been made whole. What council considered: Town counsel explained that the code (town code 3‑1‑12) gives the town discretion to pursue revocation when a licensee or owner is implicated in certain criminal actions, but it does not require action. The council reviewed a copy of the indictment, a plea agreement, the judgment and an affidavit from a forensic accountant provided by the business that stated the town’s sales‑tax receipts had not been damaged by the errors cited by federal authorities. Several local speakers urged leniency. Shalice Heaton described her husband’s decision to take a plea deal and said, "he never had any criminal intent," and listed the sentence terms he accepted. Local business and civic leaders also urged the council to preserve the business relationship. Zion Outfitter representatives told the council that some of the tax reporting questions stemmed from how parking and coin‑operated shower revenues were reported and that the company had cooperated with investigators and paid assessed liabilities. Council rationale: Multiple council members said they were persuaded by the forensic accounting evidence and by the town staff’s assessment that Springdale had not been financially harmed. Councilmember Pat Campbell said he believed the town had no unmet claim and that forcing a hearing would serve only to “pile on.” Other council members emphasized due process for the licensee and the discretionary nature of the code. Outcome and next steps: The council’s motion instructs staff not to open the revocation process now; it explicitly permits the town to revisit the decision if new information comes to light. The town will retain the public records provided and may rely on them in future deliberations. The decision does not change any state or federal findings or penalties that resulted from the separate criminal case. QUOTE: "We value the town and we value the time that we've had here," said attorney Nathan Crane, who represented Zion Outfitters during public comment and described the company’s long partnership with Springdale. Ending: Council members said the decision balanced the town’s regulatory interest with the practical effects on employees and the community. They emphasized that the choice was procedural — to decline starting the formal revocation sequence now — and that the town may reopen the matter if substantive new evidence arrives.