North Ogden council adopts 2024–25 budget amendments, shifts RDA projects to next year

The North Ogden City Council on June 24 approved changes to the city’s fiscal year 2024–25 budget and associated redevelopment agency (RDA) amendments after Finance Director Peter Brown described conservative revenue forecasts and delays to several capital projects.

Peter Brown, the city’s finance director, told the council the amendments reflect where staff now expects to “land at the end of fiscal year 24–25,” noting timing and vendor delays for capital projects and a volatile sales-tax trend. “We have some revenue lines and a couple of expenditure lines that we’re still trying to catch up on,” Brown said.

Brown said most department budgets were adjusted downward, with exceptions including a reclassification that moved an HR position into the HR budget and a reworking of Cherry Days donations that were booked in the wrong fiscal year. He said the general fund would need about $49,000 to be “whole” and that the aquatic center fund would likely draw on its own fund balance rather than receive a general-fund transfer because the RDA had previously seeded that fund.

Mayor (identified in the meeting as the presiding official) added context on the aquatics transfer: “We took $175,000 out of RDA and put it in their fund balance,” he said, explaining that infusion reduces the need for a general-fund transfer.

Brown also described recent adjustments after the packet was posted: sales-tax receipts came in lower than expected so he recommended holding the sales-tax estimate at $4,800,000 rather than increasing it, and he corrected a duplicated investment-interest line that had overstated revenue. He proposed modest adjustments to the streets budget after updated cost information arrived.

Council members pressed staff on the sales-tax outlook and the aquatic center. Council member Dalpez asked whether April’s low sales tax drove the revision; Brown said it “kicked it off” and that the trend line suggested a conservative $375,000 swing for the last two months of the fiscal year. Council member Pulver asked whether the amendments net to zero; Brown said the final adjustment was about $80,000.

Public hearing and vote The council opened a public hearing; speakers asked questions about sales-tax allocation and a “double dip” accounting error in interest revenue. Reed Miller asked how much sales tax the city receives; the mayor and staff explained the state allocation system (a portion returned based on population vs. the portion generated by local purchases). Kevin Burns asked for clarification of “double dip”; staff said a single investment had been inadvertently counted twice and that the error was corrected.

After the public hearing, Council member Barker moved to approve ordinance 2025-15 adopting the proposed 2024–25 budget amendments “with the amendments as discussed by Peter Brown.” The motion passed unanimously by roll call.

RDA amendments The council recessed into the Redevelopment Agency to consider ordinance 2025-16, the RDA budget amendment. Brown summarized that the RDA had planned to fund more of the aquatics center this year but delivery delays and project timing mean about $300,000 will remain in the RDA this fiscal year and the rest will be pushed to the next. He cited delayed playground, liners and bicentennial work as reasons funds will move forward into the next fiscal year.

A board member noted a typographical error in the draft showing a $222,000 transfer to the general fund that should instead go to the capital fund; staff said they would correct it in adoption. The RDA board moved and approved ordinance 2025-16 (the RDA budget amendment) with the correction; the vote included one abstention recorded for a member who joined late to the discussion.

Why it matters Council and staff said the amendments reflect conservative accounting practices to avoid overstating revenues, to align capital spending with actual project delivery, and to make the FY24–25 numbers auditable ahead of the year-end close. The council discussed triggers and contingency plans if sales-tax receipts continue below projections.

What comes next Staff will finalize the corrected ordinance language and the RDA transfer line, post the updated budget documents, and proceed with the next fiscal-year budget process. Council members requested clearer definitions and contingency triggers (for example, expense-reduction thresholds) so the council can act if revenues underperform.

Ending Council members and staff thanked the citizen budget committee and the city’s finance staff for the months of work that went into the numbers; Brown said he expects to finish cleanup of interest and other revenue lines during the audit process.