Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget Subcommittee topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

North Ogden schedules June work session after heated budget-subcommittee exchange

North Ogden City Council · May 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council agreed to a June 2 work session to review recommendations from a citizen budget subcommittee after members said staff rebuttals and pre-meeting communications undercut their presentation; council members and residents disagreed over whether to preserve or pare city amenities such as the aquatic center.

The North Ogden City Council said it will hold a work session on June 2 to take a closer look at recommendations from the citizen budget subcommittee, after a sometimes tense discussion at its May 12 meeting.

Brian Bartholomew, chair of the citizen budget subcommittee, opened the presentation by criticizing a succession of recent tax increases and urging the council to consider eliminating or placing time-limited “sunset” provisions on what he described as nonessential amenities. “Four tax increases in 2 to 3 years is too much,” Bartholomew said, urging the council to “eliminate some of these unnecessary things.”

Members of the budget subcommittee said they were frustrated that staff or council responses appeared in the packet ahead of their presentation. “We come with some suggestions and then that’s where it ends,” said committee member Brenda Ashdown, adding that the subcommittee had not seen sustained follow-up on prior recommendations.

Several council members pressed for a structured evaluation process rather than abrupt cuts. “Build a process where you look at these entities and you do an assessment,” said a council member who said they’d reviewed committee meetings. The council member recommended using a scorecard that would weigh financial, community and economic-development factors so officials could make informed decisions over time.

Council members expressed differing views on whether the committee or the full council should lead the evaluations. One council member called for the committee’s recommendations to inform an annual evaluation by the council; another said some long-standing decisions—such as support for parks and recreation—reflect the city’s adopted priorities and should not be repeatedly revisited without new data.

Residents who spoke during public comment offered mixed reactions. Some praised the subcommittee work and encouraged follow-through; others warned that cumulative increases in utilities, fees and property taxes could meaningfully affect household budgets and urged officials to look for ways to grow sales tax revenue instead of cutting services.

The council agreed to the June 2 work session to allow a deeper, less time-constrained conversation about the subcommittee’s proposals and the data needed to evaluate long-term sustainability of programs such as the aquatic center, recreation and parks. No formal policy changes were adopted at the May 12 meeting.