Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recorder Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Davis County Recorder reports stable revenue but seeks funds for historic preservation and staffing
Summary
Recorder Richard Vaughn told the Davis County Budget Committee that recording volumes are down with market shifts but revenues are about 1% ahead year-to-date; he requested a one-time $39,000 preservation project and flagged a staffing gap for cadastral mapping that risks extending the county—s recording-to-publication gap.
Richard Vaughn, Davis County Recorder, told the Budget Committee on Oct. 4 that recorded-document volumes have fallen substantially from the peak years but that revenues as of Sept. 30 are roughly 1% higher than the same point last year.
Vaughn said the decline in filings is "purely market driven," tied to slower home sales, while refinancing activity could boost revenues if interest rates fall. "Every document has a $40 fee," he said, explaining that more recorded documents directly increase office revenue.
The recorder presented several budget items and operational updates that he said are intended to keep the office functioning and reduce service risk. He asked the committee to consider a one-time preservation project for historic, hand-drawn county plat books; he reported a bid from Cofile Preservation of about $39,000 to disassemble, conserve and return the county—s archival plat books and some early surveyor records.
Vaughn also described a staffing gap in cadastral mapping: the office historically has had two cadastral mappers and is currently down one. He said the mapper role is central to parcel creation after splits and new developments and that reduced capacity lengthens the "recording gap" (the time between when a document is recorded and when it appears on public records). With current staff and volume, Vaughn said the gap is about six days; he warned higher volumes would extend that interval.
On records protection, Vaughn said the legislature required a property-fraud/property-alert service to be in place by Jan. 1, 2025, and his office has implemented a property-search alert that emails owners when documents are recorded against their property. He described the new protected-records category "safe at home," implemented under the Records Protection Act, and said those records are not available to the general public unless an owner authorizes access for title work.
Vaughn credited recent investments in a high-speed scanner and IT work that improved batching and indexing efficiency, and he added a modest travel line for training and conferences through industry organizations such as the Property Records Industry Association. He said the recorder—s office will seek procurement-compliant multiple quotes before awarding any preservation contract.
The committee asked questions about the Cofile bid and whether the preservation work could be phased; Vaughn said the project is a one-time scope and that transportation to the vendor (their lab was cited as in Los Angeles) and reassembly make phasing unlikely. He estimated preservation would take several weeks to complete once contracted.
The meeting did not record a formal vote on the preservation bid or a staffing authorization during this session; committee members asked staff to gather additional quotes and procurement documentation for the preservation request and to confirm budget placement for any requested backfill.
