Ogden staff: certified tax rate arrived late and came in lower; council urged to adopt budget now and revisit allocations

Ogden City staff told the Ogden City Council on June 17 that the county-certified tax rate arrived late and was slightly lower than the numbers used in the draft budget, producing an estimated shortfall of roughly $900,000 and prompting a recommendation to adopt the budget now and adjust later.

City finance presenter Glenn (City staff, finance) said, “we did get the certified tax rate this morning. It came to the city late last week. We didn't see it in our office until this morning,” and added that the rate “came in a little bit lower than they had anticipated.” He gave the council the specific rates used: last year’s adopted rate of 0.002239 compared with the new certified rate of 0.002189 and said the change “ticked down just a little bit.”

Why it matters: the certified tax rate affects the city’s property tax revenue estimates that underlie the fiscal-year budget. Staff told councilors the shortfall is not expected to require immediate cuts and can be addressed midyear when final numbers are available.

Staff recommended adopting the budget as presented and revisiting adjustments later. “The problem is because we got it so late, we're not really prepared with amendment language or anything like that to really make that change tonight,” Glenn said, adding staff can “make adjustments through the fiscal year if we need to.”

Councilors used the budget discussion to press staff about capital project funding that the administration had already moved into fiscal-year accounts. Council members raised concerns about ARPA dollars the administration had set aside for future projects and then placed into FY26 line items. Lisa (City staff, finance/CIP) confirmed that roughly $8,000,000 of ARPA money had been set aside in a city account and that three projects were shown in the FY26 budget: a $5,000,000 line item, an All Abilities Park at $500,000, and Union Station at $1,500,000 (described in the packet as part of FY26 appropriations). Lisa told the council, “If you want to pull it, it's in the fiscal year 26 budget to be appropriated that way.”

Council members said they had expected the ARPA balance to remain in an “allocated to future projects” account so money would be available if the Lester Park plan required more funding. One council member asked for full accounting of prior appropriations and the quarterly CIP report; Lisa said staff would provide up-to-date numbers and the third-quarter CIP report would have the most current balance.

No formal vote was taken on the budget or on moving ARPA dollars. Staff proposed bringing a budget opening or amendment in July if the council wants to reallocate funds; one staff suggestion was to move the FY26 line-item appropriations back into the “allocated to future projects” account and bring them forward after fuller discussion.

Discussion vs. decision: staff presented the certified tax rate and recommended adopting the budget as-is tonight with the option to amend later; councilors requested additional accounting on ARPA and CIP allocations and discussed, but did not take, a motion to pull FY26 appropriations back to future projects.

What’s next: staff said the certified tax rate adoption would be scheduled for a meeting a couple of weeks later and that a July budget opening could be used to reallocate ARPA funds if the council chooses.

Ending: City staff will provide a detailed CIP/ARPA accounting and the council will consider the certified tax rate and any budget amendments at upcoming meetings.