Mount Pleasant council votes to create ‘city special projects’ position, delays appointment pending legal steps

Mount Pleasant City Council voted Jan. 28 to create a formal “city special projects” employee position, after several council members said the role needs a clearer job description, cost-tracking and legal review before any appointment.

Councilmember Kate moved to prepare a resolution establishing the position; the motion was seconded and the council approved the resolution to create the position. Council members said they want a written job description and better accounting for time, equipment and supplies used on special projects before assigning a person to the role.

Why it matters: Council members who spoke in the discussion said the position is intended to let the city pursue smaller capital and maintenance projects in-house rather than contracting them out, which they believe can save money if the true costs—including staff hours and equipment wear—are tracked. Several council members said past projects lacked sufficient documentation to verify savings.

Council debate focused on three practical issues: a clear written job description, an accounting system to log hours and equipment on each special-project assignment, and the legal steps needed before appointing an elected official or council member to a city position. Council members repeatedly urged that any special-project work be tracked so future budget decisions can be evidence-based. As one council member put it during the discussion, “we need to track it so that in six months…was it cheaper than what we could have contracted it for?” (speaker identified in the meeting as Kate).

The council also discussed whether the role should be listed under Public Works or as a standalone city special projects position; several members preferred a city-wide title so costs are captured when Public Works staff are assigned to assist.

Legal and ethics requirements were raised during public participation. An audience member referenced Utah Code 10-3-13 and told the council that, because the person under consideration—Paul Madsen—is a council member, he must complete the required conflict-of-interest disclosure before being appointed. The commenter said the form must be submitted according to the statute’s timing requirements. The council acknowledged that step and said legal review and a finalized resolution are needed before any appointment.

The council did not appoint anyone at the meeting. Instead, it voted to have staff and city attorneys prepare a formal resolution and instructions for appointment, including a job description and any required disclosures.

Quotes (from meeting record): “I think going forward, if we have a special project person, it needs to be tracked,” Councilmember Kate said during debate.

A resident in the audience told the council, “there is a…state of Utah code, which is 10-3-13, and it’s about the ethics act…before he can be appointed or assigned to that position, he has to fill out a conflict of interest form that is required by state law.”

Ending: The council’s vote to create the position starts a staff process: prepare the resolution language, a job description, and a legal review of disclosure requirements; the council must consider the finalized resolution before appointing any individual.