Budget committee weighs trimming pool, amphitheater and other amenities to limit tax increases

At a meeting of the North Ogden City Budget Committee, members debated whether to recommend cuts or operational changes to city amenities — including the aquatic center, amphitheater and senior center — to reduce reliance on repeated property-tax increases and to clarify the full cost of those services.

“Let’s be brutally honest,” the Chair (S1) said repeatedly as the committee discussed ways to present clear cost and revenue figures to the council. Several members said they want a line-by-line accounting that includes the operating subsidy, unpaid staff or volunteer labor, and long-term capital and depreciation costs before recommending tax changes.

Staff member (S2) summarized public feedback and the items driving the proposed tax increase: “It basically says it’s for a new CSO that’s a 125,000, and then it’s for this new security software,” S2 said, describing the property-tax impact statement. Committee members questioned whether the proposed IT/security software should be categorized as public-safety spending under the ordinance and whether that classification affects what the tax revenue may lawfully fund.

The discussion framed two competing priorities: keeping services that residents value and limiting year-over-year tax growth. Chair (S1) and several committee members pointed to a string of recent property-tax increases and argued the body should consider reducing or restructuring services that are losing money. S1 cited specific examples: recreation fee revenue recorded as about $70,000 versus similar recurring expenses (not including labor), and an example calculation that a pool visit costs roughly $20 per person while the city charges about $10 per head, creating a subsidy that neighbors pay for.

Other members said a modest, predictable pay increase for city employees is necessary to retain trained staff. Staff (S2) warned that pay lag can force larger catch-up raises later and can create turnover in critical roles; S2 flagged police and water positions as recruitment concerns. Several members favored merit-based increases over automatic across-the-board raises to better target funds to high performers.

Committee member (S7) urged the committee to consider local economic development realities when weighing cuts: denser housing and larger commercial projects change the city’s tax base and service demands, and North Ogden’s limited freeway frontage constrains opportunities to attract large sales-tax-generating retailers.

On near-term next steps, the committee agreed to compile a clear set of numbers and options for the full council. Chair (S1) said he would present the committee’s analysis and requested that the council schedule time to discuss potential program savings in a work session rather than only accepting a presentation. Staff (S2) and others agreed to prepare the “brutally honest” cost sheets — including operating subsidies, likely revenue adjustments, and potential user-fee scenarios (for example, charging higher per-visit rates or raising resident/nonresident fee splits) — for council consideration.

The committee flagged two procedural items to follow up on publicly: a resolution on the pool fee schedule that will appear on the council agenda and pending discussions about transportation utility fees and health savings account timing. The committee did not take any formal votes in the meeting; members instead agreed to refine their recommendations and return them to the council for further discussion.