Eureka councilors review proposed fiscal 2025-26 budget, debate reallocations for roads, water and Memorial Building

EUREKA, Utah — The Eureka City Council reviewed a proposed budget for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026, at a May 27 work meeting, pressing staff for clearer line-item changes and debating whether to reallocate funds for roads, water-system repairs and Memorial Building renovations.

Mayor Tony Deaver opened the discussion by confirming the calendar: "we have to have our budget set up and ready to go by our second meeting in June," and asked councilors for comments on the draft that staff circulated. The council heard departmental clarifications from staff and exchanged proposals to move existing balances between accounts rather than raise new revenue.

Why it matters: the council must adopt a final budget before the statutory deadline and decide whether to use existing general-fund and B&C (pavement) funds for capital work or direct enterprise funds to pay for water repairs. Some members also raised whether to initiate a truth-in-taxation notice and how to treat elected-official pay increases under state rules.

Council discussion and numbers

Council members and staff examined several line items where actuals lag projected budget figures. The draft shows a general-fund budget of $673,000. Councilors noted building-permit revenue recorded so far (discussed in the meeting as roughly $14,029 in actual receipts) compared with a $40,000 permit revenue budget; cemetery fee receipts were listed at about $30 actual against a $5,000 budget. Councilman Scott Pugh urged the council to identify underspent lines they could reallocate to immediate needs, saying he and staff had “come up with about ... $50,000” of questioned items during a separate review.

B&C road funds: Council members discussed a $100,000 B&C appropriation with about $15,000 already spent. Councilman Jeremy Snell described a proposal to carry B&C funds forward into a larger capital road project rather than spend them now on equipment; another councilor cautioned that some uses of B&C funds are restricted and said the council should verify qualifying expenditures before reassigning the money.

Vehicles, equipment and capital planning: Capital outlay for vehicles was shown at $30,000 in the draft. Council members discussed whether some vehicle purchases had been charged to B&C projects and whether to move them to an equipment line to preserve B&C funds for a larger road project next year. The council also discussed creating or maintaining a capital improvements list so multi-year savings can roll into a capital project account, a step one member described as required by "state law" when fund balances exceed allowable general-fund percentages.

Water, sewer and emergency repairs: Councilors pressed on water-fund needs, including nonworking meters, a highway leak and needed fire-hydrant work. Staff noted the water fund’s original budget figure of about $65,000 versus roughly $68,000 in actuals, and councilors discussed whether some urgent repairs should come from the enterprise (water) fund or the general fund. A staff advisor restated that enterprise funds normally cover depreciation and maintenance and recommended setting rates to meet water-infrastructure needs; councilors acknowledged that raising water and sewer rates would increase revenue but did not adopt any rate change at the meeting.

Memorial Building and leases: The council revisited multi-year allocations toward Memorial Building repairs. Council members said the city has put $25,000 per year toward the building in prior budgets but that work has been slow; this year the council spent about $16,000 on the building and discussed whether to continue annual allocations or shift remaining funds into a capital-project account. Separately, councilors discussed finalizing written leases with the historical society and another lessee so rent, utilities and insurance responsibilities are explicit; a councilor offered to draft a lease template once terms are agreed.

Budget detail and internal accounting practices

Councilors reviewed department-specific line items that frequently show large cushions, including planning and zoning training (budgeted at $5,000 but historically underspent) and heating/shop costs in public works. One councilor asked whether the council should attempt to make the tentative budget match projected actuals more closely or leave conservative cushions in place; staff and an outside advisor explained that underspends typically roll into fund balance and can be reallocated at year-end or placed into capital reserves.

Other items discussed

- Truth in taxation: Councilors mentioned the June 1 notice deadline for truth-in-taxation procedures and observed that with the draft budget and projected fund balances it may be difficult to justify a property-tax increase without demonstrating a clear need. A councilor reminded the body that if it choses to raise elected-official pay (described in the meeting as a stipend), state law now requires a separate public hearing addressing that single issue before pay increases take effect. - Code enforcement and animal control: Staff reported a new code-enforcement line and proposed animal-control and contract amounts; councilors asked staff to estimate wages, fuel and contract costs and suggested revenue from fines/forfeitures be adjusted to offset expenses. - Bookmobile invoice: Staff said the city will prepare a prorated invoice to the school district for its share of the bookmobile contract. - Building-permit process: Staff confirmed soil reports are required before issuing building permits and that those reports are being uploaded to the city’s iWORKS system.

Decisions and next steps

No formal budget adoption occurred at the work meeting. Councilors asked staff to provide a version showing deltas from the tentative budget (the items changed since last year) and to mark lines with zero balances so the printed report shows newly added budget categories such as code enforcement. Members indicated they will: (1) identify line-item reallocations they want included in a revised tentative budget, (2) confirm allowable uses of B&C road funds before moving money to equipment, (3) consider whether to raise water/sewer rates as an alternative revenue source, and (4) finalize lease terms with the historical society and other lessees.

Votes at a glance

A procedural motion to adjourn the work meeting was made and seconded; the council voted in favor by voice and the meeting was closed.

Ending note

Staff were directed to return a revised budget worksheet showing only the deltas from last year’s tentative numbers and to prepare the additional materials the council requested so members can act at the next regular meeting in June.