[0:01] Spencer, [clears throat] you can come up

[0:02] while we're waiting.

[0:07] Okay.

[0:08] We'll go to public hearing item number

[0:09] one, uh public hearing related actions.

[0:13] The council will accept public comment

[0:15] and may approve the following items.

[0:16] Item number one, public hearing on the

[0:18] proposed tax increase for the city of

[0:20] Saratoga Springs.

[0:21] I have to read this first.

[0:24] Uh the city of Saratoga Springs is

[0:25] proposing a 50.03 property tax increase

[0:29] for an additional [clears throat] 3.1

[0:30] million

[0:31] in revenue that will be generated each

[0:32] year

[0:33] by the proposed increase in the

[0:35] certified tax rate to point 001467

[0:39] for the purpose of funding public safety

[0:41] with the intended use of additional fire

[0:44] and police services. Spencer.

[0:47] >> All right. Good evening, um

[0:50] Evening, Mayor and Council. If it makes

[0:51] you guys feel better, um last time we

[0:53] did truth in taxation for the city here,

[0:54] I was in high school. Um

[0:57] so, it's been a while.

[0:59] Um as the Mayor

[1:00] um stated, this is a proposed property

[1:03] tax increase as part of fiscal year

[1:05] 2026-2027.

[1:06] Um it is um

[1:08] the city is asking for 3.1 million in

[1:11] additional property tax revenue. So,

[1:12] it's approximately a 50% increase. Um it

[1:15] would So, right now, without the

[1:17] property tax increase, our property tax

[1:19] rate would be point 000978.

[1:22] Um and with the increase, it proposed

[1:24] increase would be point 001467.

[1:27] Um any questions for staff at this time?

[1:33] » No.

[1:34] >> I

[1:35] Can I say one thing, Chris?

[1:37] >> What?

[1:38] >> Spencer, can can I say one thing?

[1:40] >> Yeah, go ahead.

[1:41] >> Can you translate that? I mean, we're

[1:43] all talking about the 50% but can we ask

[1:46] on the median income, like on a 500,000,

[1:48] what does that mean?

[1:49] >> So, as part of the um

[1:52] presentation that we have to do, the

[1:53] property tax impact schedule,

[1:55] um the state requires us to do it on a I

[1:58] believe it was a median median average

[2:01] home, which is 541,873,000

[2:04] City of Saratoga Springs. Um, that would

[2:06] be an approximately $145

[2:09] increase per year.

[2:10] Um, so versus what you're already over

[2:13] you're already paying for the city.

[2:15] >> Okay, thank you.

[2:16] >> Yeah, thanks Spencer.

[2:19] We'll move to the public hearing.

[2:21] So,

[2:22] I'm going to open the public hearing for

[2:24] public hearing item one. Please be

[2:27] respectful in your comments. Please

[2:28] limit your comments to 3 minutes. Time

[2:30] may not be given to another commenter.

[2:31] Please avoid repetitive comments.

[2:34] Uh, we do have currently 11 people

[2:36] signed up in the room for public

[2:38] comment. I will go down the list. We

[2:41] also have

[2:43] uh, submitted public comments that we

[2:44] will read and then we potentially will

[2:46] have online public comments. We will

[2:48] start with the in-room comments. We're

[2:50] going to start with Julie King.

[2:53] You have 3 minutes.

[3:00] » [clears throat]

[3:02] » It just please push the button.

[3:07] » My name is Julie King and I've been a

[3:09] resident of Saratoga Springs for 21

[3:10] years.

[3:11] We were here when Governor Herbert cut

[3:13] the ribbon on Pioneer Crossing. My

[3:15] children have attended five schools in

[3:17] Saratoga Springs and one school in Lehi.

[3:19] We have lived through a tremendous

[3:20] amount of growth and we have a pretty

[3:22] good idea of what is coming.

[3:24] I also have a unique perspective because

[3:26] I'm an elected official. I have been in

[3:28] the seats you are sitting in now and

[3:30] I've gone through the truth and taxation

[3:31] process multiple times. I know what

[3:34] happens behind the scenes. I know the

[3:36] hundreds of hours spent pouring over

[3:38] budgets, looking for efficiencies,

[3:40] trying to find resources with limited

[3:41] dollars, and making difficult decisions

[3:44] about what can and cannot be funded.

[3:46] I also understand the responsibility of

[3:48] taking care of employees and making sure

[3:49] they they fairly compensated while being

[3:52] mindful of the impact on families and

[3:54] their household budgets.

[3:56] >> [clears throat]

[3:56] >> A few weeks ago, I stood outside

[3:58] watching a wildfire creep closer and

[4:01] closer to our brand new high school. I

[4:03] saw firefighters save homes and save our

[4:06] high school.

[4:07] Our firefighters and those who provided

[4:09] mutual aid from other municipalities not

[4:11] only saved the school, they saved our

[4:13] district money in costs and delays in

[4:15] that school opening.

[4:17] Thank you.

[4:19] Um I also have another perspective that

[4:22] I think is important. I am now working

[4:24] in the very city office building that

[4:26] the city has made work for many years.

[4:28] I have seen how that space has been

[4:30] repurposed, rearranged, and reconsidered

[4:32] again and again to make it work. And I

[4:34] think that is a pretty good metaphor for

[4:36] Saratoga Springs. We make it work. We

[4:39] make do.

[4:40] We stretch what we have just a little

[4:41] bit farther. And for a long time, that's

[4:44] been the right thing to do. But I think

[4:45] we've reached a point where we need to

[4:46] be honest about the scale of what is

[4:48] coming.

[4:49] The Lake Mountain School District has

[4:50] completed a 15-year capital plan based

[4:52] on the growth we anticipate in Saratoga

[4:54] Springs and Eagle Mountain. We're

[4:56] estimating that we will need to build 17

[4:57] schools in 15 years.

[5:00] To say it again, 17 schools in 15 years.

[5:03] That growth does not just affect the

[5:04] school district, it also affects the

[5:06] city.

[5:07] When we open our new high school in

[5:08] 2028, we're going to ask the city to

[5:10] provide a school resource officer. And

[5:12] that will be true for every secondary

[5:13] school, every middle school, and every

[5:15] high school we open. When we build

[5:16] elementary schools, the city will be

[5:18] asked to provide crossing guards. More

[5:20] schools means more roads, more traffic,

[5:23] more public safety needs, more parks,

[5:25] more infrastructure, and more demand for

[5:27] the services that only the city

[5:28] provides.

[5:29] We are one community. The decisions we

[5:32] make in one level of government have

[5:33] consequences for the others. I know this

[5:36] council's focused on being careful

[5:37] stewards of taxpayer dollars, but I also

[5:39] think we have to recognize that a 2008

[5:42] dollar is not the same as a 2026 dollar.

[5:45] At some point, that making do becomes

[5:48] falling behind.

[5:50] At some point, stretching what we have

[5:51] becomes asking our employees to do more

[5:54] with less, delaying necessary

[5:56] investments, or shifting costs into the

[5:57] future.

[5:58] We have made it work. We have made do.

[6:01] I believe we need to make thoughtful

[6:02] investments today so that we aren't

[6:04] paying a much higher price for deferred

[6:06] decisions tomorrow. As a resident and a

[6:09] tax-paying individual, I want you to

[6:11] know that I support the proposed

[6:12] certified tax rate. Thank you.

[6:15] >> Thank you. I just want to verify with

[6:16] staff that

[6:17] we're running the clock.

[6:19] Correct. Okay.

[6:21] All right. Next we have Daniel Dunham. I

[6:23] will try and get everybody's name right.

[6:30] And Daniel, do you have the Do you have

[6:31] the packet?

[6:32] >> Yep.

[6:32] >> Okay.

[6:34] >> And I actually want to refer to that

[6:35] packet a few times.

[6:37] Um you'll find that there are a few

[6:38] things that are highlighted in here.

[6:40] Um

[6:42] you you say this tax increase is about

[6:44] uh public safety?

[6:46] No.

[6:47] It isn't.

[6:49] If you really cared about public safety,

[6:51] you get rid of him.

[6:53] You get rid of his department.

[6:56] So, you look on page three.

[7:00] You'll see that uh use of deadly force.

[7:03] There have been five instances in the

[7:04] period where his department has been

[7:06] responsible for the death of five

[7:08] different individuals.

[7:10] You look on page five.

[7:13] During the same time period, there have

[7:14] been no reported homicides in the city

[7:16] of Saratoga Springs.

[7:18] The only deaths involving police are

[7:20] those caused by the police.

[7:25] When

[7:31] Trying to catch my notes.

[7:33] There is a another reference in here.

[7:37] Um again with the deadly force.

[7:39] Most killings by police per arrest than

[7:41] 95% of all departments that are in here.

[7:46] When you look on

[7:50] page six,

[7:51] there's a list of the police

[7:52] departments.

[7:54] This is the seventh worst police

[7:55] department in the state out of 116.

[8:00] It is also, when you look at the second

[8:02] page,

[8:04] and [clears throat] you look at police

[8:05] funding,

[8:06] it is higher than 90% of the police

[8:09] departments of a similar supplies sized

[8:12] city.

[8:14] They're overfunded.

[8:16] Their police

[8:17] violence is at 16%, which is

[8:20] significant. They are very violent

[8:23] individuals, or at least a very violent

[8:25] department.

[8:27] There was a report of a guy who their

[8:30] kids phone

[8:32] was faulty.

[8:34] They sent six cars and a canine unit and

[8:36] threatened the homeowner.

[8:39] For a faulty phone.

[8:41] Why do they have six cars to send?

[8:44] And this isn't one thing.

[8:47] This happens.

[8:48] When there's been police accidents,

[8:49] there's usually four or five cars

[8:51] sitting there.

[8:53] It it's

[8:54] they have too much. And then there's

[8:56] their unmarked cars.

[8:58] Talking with somebody who was in the

[8:59] industry, who was involved in in

[9:01] unmarked cars, Cedar Douglas Springs has

[9:03] the most of anybody in the state.

[9:07] So,

[9:08] these guys have a lot of money, they

[9:10] have a lot of equipment, and a lot of

[9:12] spare time.

[9:15] It's a waste.

[9:17] So,

[9:18] rather than provide six more officers,

[9:21] cut 12.

[9:24] Start with him.

[9:31] » Thank you. We'll go to Cecil Turley.

[9:41] » You good?

[9:41] >> I did the same thing.

[9:43] >> Okay.

[9:44] >> Not bad.

[9:47] » Then we'll go to uh Morgan

[9:50] Humphries. I hope I got that right.

[9:52] Morgan, my good?

[9:54] >> Yep.

[9:54] >> Okay.

[9:55] Thank you.

[10:00] » So, I'm here because of the tax

[10:02] increase, 50%. We're one of the highest

[10:05] in the state. I understand the need. I

[10:07] think it's excessive.

[10:09] First off, what are we doing with our

[10:11] tax money?

[10:12] Are we being good stewards, or are we

[10:14] not?

[10:16] The only thing I can do is go off of

[10:17] what I know. I'm an engineer. I look I'm

[10:20] not trying to be

[10:21] picky on the engineering department, but

[10:24] I went through their stuff and and

[10:26] just pure math, the average

[10:29] cost of each employee is 190 grand.

[10:34] The most that a city engineer can make

[10:36] per year, guys, is documentation,

[10:40] is 156 grand or 153.

[10:45] If everybody makes what the city

[10:46] engineer makes, we have over 20% of the

[10:49] budget going to incidentals.

[10:52] And that is low. I will tell you right

[10:54] now it's probably more around 40.

[10:57] Okay?

[10:58] To me that that's just one area where I

[10:59] look at and I go

[11:01] I understand that you have to add

[11:03] benefits in. I understand that there's

[11:05] other things to be added.

[11:07] If I can find it in one department, I

[11:09] can find it in all.

[11:13] I will say that I also am not very happy

[11:16] about

[11:17] the non-marked cars.

[11:20] I feel like we are over-policing in this

[11:22] area

[11:23] in the sense of traffic control. Traffic

[11:26] control and accidents are based off

[11:28] conflict points.

[11:30] happen at intersections.

[11:33] are where accidents occur.

[11:35] That is where the damage, that's where

[11:37] the public safety, that's where the risk

[11:38] is. It's not going down the street going

[11:40] 20 miles an hour over.

[11:42] I know that we want to see and think

[11:44] that, but that doesn't usually cause

[11:45] accidents unless that person is weaving

[11:47] in and out of other people.

[11:49] But that's where we go get almost all of

[11:51] our tickets.

[11:53] That I think is wrong. If it's a public

[11:56] safety issue,

[11:57] go to the intersections. Don't go

[12:00] to the straightaways. That's not going

[12:02] to If somebody's speeding there, that's

[12:04] not going to cause it.

[12:06] Okay?

[12:08] Third point, what is animal control

[12:10] doing in this city?

[12:13] What do they do?

[12:14] They go get dogs and then they charge

[12:16] you to get them back. Okay?

[12:18] It's starting to feel like a

[12:21] an ongoing thing.

[12:22] Okay? The police like to police where

[12:25] people can't see their cars and they get

[12:27] revenue.

[12:29] Animal control goes and gets revenue

[12:31] from dogs. We ask to come get cats, they

[12:33] go go trap them first.

[12:35] A cat.

[12:39] I'm not talking about a cougar and I'm

[12:41] not talking about a bobcat. I'm talking

[12:42] about a feline housecat

[12:45] that people can't come get, animal

[12:47] control?

[12:48] No, that's not my job. That is utter BS.

[12:53] And that is my That's I'll stop because

[12:55] my time's up, but that is it's it's

[12:58] ridiculous.

[13:00] And that is one of the points that I

[13:02] will make is animal control should be

[13:04] gone unless they start doing their job.

[13:07] And that is we live in a

[13:09] area of wilderness. You as animal

[13:13] control need to come take care of

[13:15] wilderness

[13:20] » Thank you. We'll go to Brian King.

[13:31] » Uh good evening. I'm Brian King. I've

[13:33] lived here for about 21 years and uh

[13:36] live up in Harvest Hills. I am speaking

[13:38] tonight in favor of the proposed tax

[13:40] increase.

[13:41] Um I looked down the list of things that

[13:44] are uh

[13:45] that we need and will pay for with this

[13:47] and I think those are all things that I

[13:48] want. I want to know that we have safety

[13:51] officers out there citing individuals

[13:54] who are cutting roundabouts or driving

[13:55] erratically.

[13:56] >> would be for funding um additional fire

[13:59] and police services. I was not aware

[14:00] that nearly 2 million of it would be

[14:02] going to other things. Um one of them

[14:04] being parks, which I mean, considering the wrap tax, I will

[14:08] admit right now that I do not know much

[14:10] about the city budget and so that is on

[14:13] me to learn more. Um but I am curious to

[14:16] know if any lower priority spending has

[14:18] already been cut or deferred. But I just

[14:21] have to say I'm truly grateful for our

[14:23] for law enforcement and firefighters.

[14:25] Having had the opportunity to be a

[14:27] firefighter for the for a day, um they

[14:30] have done an outstanding job. I'm just

[14:32] really grateful for them. Thank you for

[14:33] your service and your time.

[14:37] » Thank you, Leah. We'll go to Jennifer

[14:39] Scranton.

[14:51] » Good evening. My name is Jennifer

[14:52] Scranton. I'm a Saratoga Springs uh

[14:55] homeowner.

[14:56] I do appreciate the importance of

[14:58] police, fire, and EMS. I really thank

[15:01] you. Uh

[15:02] and I understand that our city has grown

[15:04] tremendously

[15:05] and that the cost of providing these

[15:07] services has increased.

[15:09] However, um I am concerned about the 3.1

[15:13] million property tax increase and I have

[15:15] a few questions.

[15:17] Saratoga Springs has grown approximately

[15:19] 16,000 res- or

[15:22] has grown from approximately 16,000

[15:24] residents in 2008 to more than 72,000

[15:27] today.

[15:28] And I'd like the city to explain how

[15:31] much additional revenue that growth has

[15:33] generated and why the revenues

[15:35] associated with that growth are not

[15:37] sufficient to cover the cost created by

[15:40] the growth of today.

[15:42] My second question is why does

[15:46] >> Clarissa Cooper

[15:54] » Hi. I will speak quickly and plainly. Uh

[15:57] I wanted to say that I am super happy to

[15:59] pay more taxes, especially when they

[16:01] support the library and my house not

[16:03] burning down.

[16:04] Big fan of my house not burning down.

[16:06] Big fan of the library.

[16:08] Uh I run things with the Friends of the

[16:10] Library and frequently before I would

[16:12] talk to people and they'd say, "Oh, I

[16:13] didn't know we had a library."

[16:15] And everyone I talk to now loves the new

[16:17] space.

[16:18] And it's amazing.

[16:20] And it's a lifeline to moms in the

[16:22] community with story time.

[16:24] But like that fills up and it's not

[16:26] because the room is full. It's because

[16:28] they don't have the staffing to be able

[16:30] to supervise more kids in there.

[16:33] So, I am really excited about the idea

[16:35] of there being more employees for the

[16:37] library with the tax increase.

[16:39] And so, I just wanted to say thank you

[16:42] for doing the brave thing and

[16:44] asking the people of Utah to pay $150 a

[16:47] year

[16:48] for just amazing benefits. My husband,

[16:51] when I was telling him about

[16:53] uh the benefits for the library thought

[16:56] that that tax increase was exclusively

[16:58] paying for the library because of how

[16:59] much value we feel like we'd be getting

[17:01] there. So,

[17:02] thank you. I appreciate it.

[17:06] >> Thank you. You had Karen Crouch.

[17:17] » Good evening.

[17:18] I wasn't sure I was going to speak

[17:19] tonight and one of the speakers already

[17:21] kind of hit on a lot of the topics that

[17:24] I wanted to talk about. Just have we

[17:27] really researched and cut waste where we

[17:31] could? Because while $150

[17:34] based on your average

[17:37] house

[17:38] isn't a lot, it assumes that year after

[17:41] year that nothing else will raise. But

[17:45] income will raise because we're we have

[17:47] more and more residents. So, I think we

[17:50] are spending wisely on the police and

[17:54] libraries and all of that, but I'm just

[17:56] wondering if we have cut other areas.

[17:59] Uh one thing that I noticed as as

[18:03] someone that goes to Patriot Park a lot,

[18:05] we're watering cement. So, we're not

[18:09] fixing those things and we're wasting

[18:11] money. So, I really want to make sure

[18:14] that we're not wasting money and that we

[18:16] understand that there are some senior

[18:18] citizens here, which I am one of, and

[18:21] we're on fixed income, and a 50% tax

[18:24] increase caught my eye. So, I would I do

[18:28] want to feel that you've taken this

[18:30] seriously and cut all the waste that you

[18:32] can. Thank you.

[18:34] >> Thank you, Sharon.

[18:38] Okay, forgive me on the next last name.

[18:40] I've got Steven

[18:41] Witkovich?

[18:50] » Hi.

[18:51] Um a lot of my concerns have been

[18:53] addressed by

[18:55] previous people, but I um did want to

[18:57] make a few comments. I moved into

[18:59] Saratoga Springs in uh 2006, so I've

[19:02] been here about 20 years.

[19:04] Um

[19:06] a couple things that I don't really

[19:07] understand that would help me is

[19:10] like they said the statistic 16,000 back

[19:12] then, 70,000 now. So, from my

[19:15] perspective,

[19:16] the tax base, the residential tax base

[19:19] has grown astronomically, and then we

[19:21] put in

[19:22] so many businesses over the last 20

[19:24] years, and I can't understand why all

[19:29] those residents, you know, paying into

[19:31] the pool, plus all those businesses

[19:32] paying into the pool,

[19:34] can't cover our tax base. So, that's one

[19:36] thing I

[19:37] I'd like to um ask as a question.

[19:40] The second thing is, I know we've been

[19:42] criticized in the past for our police

[19:44] budget being overinflated, and I feel

[19:47] like it is overinflated, and I feel like

[19:49] a million dollars for four new hires?

[19:52] From my simple math, that's $250,000 per hire.

[19:57] That's pretty good. My dad was a police

[19:59] officer for 30 years. Never made

[20:01] $250,000.

[20:03] So, obviously, that budget, there's a

[20:05] lot of other stuff in there besides four

[20:07] hires.

[20:08] But, I believe our police budget should

[20:10] be reduced, not increased.

[20:13] Same concern, 50% in 1 year. Could we do

[20:16] 15% over 3 years?

[20:19] Final point, um when I moved here from

[20:21] Sandy in 2006,

[20:24] my property taxes immediately doubled,

[20:27] and I was kind of in sticker shock. It's

[20:29] like, "How can Sandy provide such

[20:31] excellent services to their residents

[20:34] for half the amount of half the property

[20:36] tax in Saratoga Springs can?" Now, I've

[20:38] been paying double for the last 20 years

[20:40] cuz I got used to the the new tax

[20:42] burden, but

[20:44] it seems that as we approach the size of

[20:46] Sandy, we should also be getting the

[20:48] efficiencies of Sandy, and we don't seem

[20:50] to be doing that. I don't know what

[20:52] Sandy's current tax rates are, but

[20:55] when we're fully built out, and we're

[20:57] going to be a, you know, 100,000 or so,

[20:59] right? We're going to be equivalent to

[21:01] Sandy.

[21:03] How is it that they can figure out how

[21:05] to keep taxes low, and we can't? I don't

[21:07] believe that they're any smarter than we

[21:08] are.

[21:09] But they must be doing something right

[21:10] that we're not doing and maybe we could

[21:12] learn some lessons from them.

[21:14] Um

[21:15] and then finally uh and this was I

[21:17] didn't know this until tonight reading

[21:18] over the docs. I'm looking at our the

[21:20] cities around us.

[21:22] We're the highest tax increase city over

[21:24] all the other cities. They're like 6, 8,

[21:26] 10% except for Eagle Mountain who's gone

[21:28] nuts and they they decided to do a 200%

[21:30] tax increase, but

[21:32] it's like what are these other cities

[21:34] doing that we can't figure out how to do

[21:36] to keep their tax increases reasonable?

[21:38] 6, 8, 10% that's reasonable. Inflation,

[21:42] right? We're covering inflation.

[21:44] But 50%?

[21:45] Something's going wrong here. It's it's

[21:48] um

[21:50] There there there's there's got to be

[21:51] something that we can do better

[21:54] to be more efficient. Thank you.

[22:00] » Thank you. We've got Lynn Archuleta.

[22:14] » Hi. Um I was born and raised here in

[22:17] Utah. Lived in Salt Lake most of my life

[22:20] until 2020 I came here to Saratoga

[22:22] Springs.

[22:23] Um I worked for the state of Utah for 38

[22:25] years ending um as a budget officer for

[22:29] the Department of Veterans and Military

[22:31] Affairs. So, I understand budgeting very

[22:34] well. And um I I've I've been up to the

[22:37] legislature and gone through that whole

[22:40] budget process

[22:41] uh for the 12 years that I worked for

[22:43] the Department of Veterans Affairs and

[22:46] um

[22:47] I am also just retired

[22:50] um

[22:51] last year

[22:52] and 50% really

[22:55] screamed to me as well. I understand

[22:58] and I expected have tax increases every

[23:01] year and I get that. You know, I I

[23:03] understand it's it's necessary, but 50%

[23:07] is extreme, especially when I'm as I

[23:10] would have always been a single

[23:12] parent

[23:13] and have struggled my whole life, and

[23:17] I thought I could live off my

[23:18] retirement, and I am struggling. I

[23:22] had no idea how much taxes I they take

[23:25] out retirement. Um it's just this is a

[23:28] lot, and when I look at the numbers, um

[23:31] like I just looked at what the budget

[23:33] was for, um

[23:35] the police

[23:37] over a million dollars, like the man

[23:38] just said.

[23:41] I have I know that government on my

[23:44] experience of 38 years of government is leaning towards top-heavy.

[23:50] And

[23:51] we can

[23:53] I've gone through lots of budgets, you

[23:55] know, cutting budgets where

[23:58] at the state level, they're constantly

[24:00] asking departments to cut budgets, cut

[24:02] budgets. Where can you cut back? A lot

[24:04] of the people already addressed what I

[24:05] wanted to say here, but

[24:09] you can cut. You just got to

[24:12] dive in there and cut. When I see

[24:16] to you know, the

[24:17] I I know police are necessary, but when I

[24:21] first moved here, we had a fire in my

[24:23] house

[24:24] literally was almost caught fire. I had

[24:26] to go, and it it's scary. We we need to

[24:30] fund the fire department. We need more

[24:32] firefighters here. Um the growth, you

[24:35] know,

[24:37] the last gentleman that said there's so

[24:39] much growth, you know, why isn't that

[24:41] compensating? We there's got to be

[24:44] something. We got to dig and find out

[24:47] how to be more efficient, where we can

[24:49] cut, and not be top-heavy anywhere.

[24:55] That's a lot of money for four four

[24:57] positions in that's a lot. It It seems

[25:01] top-heavy to me. My department was

[25:03] top-heavy.

[25:06] I don't know. I I'm just really

[25:08] concerned. I I I drive here and I live

[25:12] at the end by the lake and for me to go

[25:15] anywhere any day

[25:17] Is that my time? Sorry.

[25:19] >> Yeah, thank you.

[25:20] >> Thank you.

[25:25] » Okay.

[25:26] Do we have more

[25:28] signed up for in room?

[25:33] Wendy, are there more signed up on the

[25:34] sheet back there or

[25:40] If we have another one, you want to just

[25:42] come up and state your name.

[25:50] For in room, if you want to if there's

[25:52] more public comment, you can come up to

[25:54] the microphone, state your name.

[26:08] » Um my name is Beth Allen and I'm a

[26:10] resident here in Saratoga Springs and I

[26:12] do um have similar questions as as other

[26:15] people have asked is um why the growth

[26:20] in businesses haven't compensated for

[26:23] the tax need. And I'm wondering if some

[26:27] of the businesses have been given

[26:29] incentives, like have they gotten tax

[26:31] breaks and maybe

[26:32] that might need to be explained or

[26:34] something. And then

[26:35] um I'm also just making a comment on the

[26:38] library. Um

[26:41] I love the library. I absolutely love

[26:42] it. It's super hard to volunteer there.

[26:46] >> [clears throat]

[26:46] >> Um

[26:47] so if if there is a way to make

[26:49] volunteering easier at the library, then

[26:52] maybe we wouldn't have to hire other

[26:54] people if it wasn't like a 6-month

[26:56] process of background checks and just a

[26:59] volunteer.

[27:01] Um if we weren't so picky on the

[27:03] volunteers.

[27:06] Thank you.

[27:07] >> Thank you.

[27:09] While we wait to see if there's more,

[27:11] let's go to

[27:13] some of the online's.

[27:15] Nikki, we could do that.

[27:18] Yeah, go ahead, Mark.

[27:20] >> Sorry.

[27:21] >> Do you Mark, did you have something?

[27:22] >> Do you want her to read them?

[27:23] >> Yes, yeah, I was going to have her read

[27:25] the read the online comments. I believe

[27:26] we had five submitted online.

[27:29] And we're going to we're going to have

[27:30] you read those with the same 3-minute

[27:32] timer clock.

[27:33] And if whatever doesn't get read in the

[27:36] 3 minutes will just be it's already

[27:38] submitted into the record.

[27:41] >> All right, we have Kevin Marsh.

[27:43] He says, "I'm opposed to increasing

[27:45] property tax rates by this much. I can't

[27:47] speak for others, but I have been

[27:49] observing that the last few years have

[27:51] been death by 1,000 cuts.

[27:54] Everything is getting more expensive,

[27:56] every tax rate is going up, every

[27:58] purchase we make just to survive has

[28:00] gone up by dramatic amounts. While wages

[28:03] have largely remained stagnant, I

[28:05] understand the need for additional

[28:07] revenue to counter some of the

[28:08] shortfall, but this amount is too much

[28:11] and will further strain the budgets of

[28:12] those who can afford it the least.

[28:14] Please consider an increase of 12 to 17%

[28:17] instead of 50."

[28:21] That's the end, Katie.

[28:27] Uh Brandon Anderson

[28:30] says, "I support this tax increase for

[28:32] better emergency and public safety. I've

[28:35] lived here long enough to watch Harvest

[28:37] Hills go from the edge of a town to a

[28:39] cut-through. Mount View corridor empties

[28:41] into my neighborhood and more and more.

[28:44] What comes down Harvest Hills Boulevard

[28:46] is not resident traffic. Redwood Road is

[28:49] worse. The city is the only group that

[28:51] can solve this problem, and we need

[28:53] better enforcement of traffic laws along

[28:55] our roads.

[28:57] With this tax, the city can hire

[28:59] additional law enforcement officers so

[29:01] we can better enforce the existing laws

[29:03] by slowing down cut-through traffic on

[29:05] our residential roads and along Redwood

[29:08] Road.

[29:09] It will make our roads safer for our

[29:10] kids, and we desperately need them to be

[29:12] safer. Please say yes.

[29:20] Josh Kimball states, "I saw that

[29:23] property taxes are proposed to raise by

[29:25] around 50%, and I'm writing to give my

[29:28] dissent to this decision.

[29:30] With the rapid growth rapid growth in

[29:33] the city

[29:34] is experiencing in both new residential

[29:36] construction and industrial business and

[29:38] office space, I feel that the money

[29:41] received through this growth should

[29:42] bring in sufficient money instead of

[29:44] burdening residents with yet another

[29:46] increase to our lives where the cost of

[29:48] living is already out of control

[29:50] expensive.

[29:58] Jordan Hyde

[30:00] says, "Mayor and City Council, the

[30:02] this comment is in support of the

[30:04] proposed tax rate increase.

[30:06] While paying higher taxes is

[30:08] uncomfortable, the proposal is a

[30:10] necessary and reasonable investment in

[30:12] the continued success and well-being of

[30:14] Saratoga Springs.

[30:16] The purpose and justification for this

[30:18] increase are clearly stated in the

[30:21] proposal with spending specific to

[30:23] services the entire city rely and

[30:26] depends on.

[30:27] It is hard to argue against the

[30:29] necessity of well-funded police

[30:31] officers,

[30:33] firefighters, and emergency personnel

[30:35] with appropriate and adequate training

[30:37] and equipment. As our city continues to

[30:40] grow, this investment will be more

[30:42] important. This proposal is fiscally

[30:45] responsible and justified. I put my full

[30:48] support behind this proposal and

[30:49] encourage the City Council to approve

[30:52] the proposed property tax increase. This

[30:55] proposal is fiscally responsible and

[30:57] justified.

[30:58] I put my full support behind this

[31:00] proposal and encourage the City Council

[31:02] to approve the proposed property tax

[31:04] increase. That was in there twice.

[31:13] Clarissa Bascom

[31:15] um wrote to the public comment regarding

[31:17] the proposed tax increase uh with

[31:20] questions. Dear Mayor, City Council

[31:22] members, and fellow residents,

[31:25] like many residents, I am trying to

[31:27] understand the need for a proposed

[31:29] property tax increase that has been

[31:31] described as the first city tax increase

[31:33] since 2008.

[31:35] As a homeowner, a taxpayer, and someone

[31:37] who cares deeply about our community, I

[31:40] believe it is important that this

[31:41] decision be based on a complete

[31:43] understanding of the city's financial

[31:45] history and not solely on the statement

[31:47] that taxes have not been increased for

[31:49] many years.

[31:51] A 50% increase in the city's property

[31:53] tax is significant for many families.

[31:56] Because this decision rests with the

[31:57] City Council, I respectfully ask that

[32:00] residents be provided with additional

[32:02] information so we can better understand

[32:04] why this increase is necessary and

[32:06] whether all reasonable alternatives have

[32:08] been considered.

[32:10] I respectfully request clarification on

[32:12] the following questions.

[32:13] It is accurate that while the city has

[32:15] not adopted a truth in taxation property

[32:17] tax increase since 2008,

[32:20] the city's property tax revenue has

[32:22] nevertheless increased substantially

[32:23] through the construction of thousands of

[32:25] new homes and commercial properties?

[32:28] As Saratoga Springs has an experienced

[32:30] tremendous growth, has the city also

[32:33] received increased recurring revenue

[32:35] from other sources including sales tax,

[32:37] building permit fees, impact fees,

[32:41] state shared revenue, franchise fees,

[32:43] and other growth-related revenues? If

[32:45] so, how have those revenues changed over

[32:47] time?

[32:48] Is it correct that Utah County collects

[32:50] property taxes on behalf of Saratoga

[32:52] Springs and distributes the city's share

[32:55] back to the city?

[32:57] How has the city's overall revenue

[32:58] changed since 2008, and how has that

[33:01] additional revenue been allocated?

[33:04] Specifically, how much annual revenue

[33:06] has been generated by new residential

[33:08] construction?

[33:09] How much annual revenue has been

[33:11] generated by commercial developers?

[33:13] How much has total city property tax

[33:16] revenue increased since 2008?

[33:18] Which departments have experienced the

[33:20] greatest increases in spending? How much

[33:23] of the proposed increase is intended to

[33:25] maintain existing services versus

[33:27] expanding services?

[33:29] As the city's budget has grown, have

[33:31] city services grown proportionally?

[33:34] For example, if the city's property tax

[33:36] revenue has increased significantly over

[33:38] the past 18 years,

[33:40] have residents seen comparable increases

[33:42] in roads, public safety, parks,

[33:45] staffing, and other essential services?

[33:48] A comparison of budget growth alongside

[33:50] measurable service improvements would

[33:52] help residents better understand the

[33:54] need for additional taxation.

[33:56] What portion of growth-related

[33:58] infrastructure has been funded

[34:00] through developer impact fees rather

[34:02] than property taxes? Have those impact

[34:05] fees kept pace with the costs created by

[34:07] new development?

[34:08] Many residents have expressed concerns

[34:10] about continued rapid growth. If

[34:12] additional property tax revenue is

[34:14] approved to address growth-related

[34:16] needs, what is the city's long-term plan

[34:19] to manage them?

[34:25] And have we received any more?

[34:27] >> We have not.

[34:28] >> Um is

[34:30] uh

[34:31] Derek Andrews online?

[34:32] >> Um, he is not online, but there are two

[34:35] people online. Um, one just has a phone

[34:38] number and one I do have a name.

[34:39] >> Do you want me to do Do you want to do

[34:41] those first and then we'll wait if Derek

[34:43] doesn't show up, we can read his?

[34:44] >> That's great.

[34:45] >> Yes. Um, for sure.

[34:47] So, I am going to promote Tammy

[34:49] Christopherson to a panelist so that she

[34:53] is able to share her thoughts with us.

[34:56] Um, in doing that, I'm going to also,

[34:59] um, move my computer to the front so

[35:02] that the city council can see her face

[35:06] if she wants you to. Um, because that

[35:08] was something that, um, we were supposed

[35:10] to ensure that residents had that

[35:12] ability.

[35:15] Tammy, it looks like you are muted.

[35:25] Perfect. So, hold on just 1 second. I'm

[35:26] going to turn up my sound and put a

[35:28] microphone to my speaker so that you can

[35:31] become part of the public record. Okay?

[35:34] You can go ahead and start.

[35:38] >> Okay, this was kind of a surprise. Um,

[35:41] I a lot of this has been covered, um,

[35:44] with what everyone said, so I just go

[35:46] yes cuz I'm not for

[35:50] it

[35:52] Sorry. For us who are retired, I figured

[35:55] that this increase it will it is 20% of

[35:59] income that I get from social security

[36:01] and what little I've saved. 20%.

[36:05] And when it said in 2008, they haven't

[36:08] had any increase, but

[36:10] my

[36:11] property taxes have gone up 5% every

[36:14] year.

[36:15] But I'm also for if it's if it's 51%,

[36:19] why can't we drag it out over time and

[36:22] not just go wham 50%? That's just

[36:26] It just I it just gets really scary that

[36:30] it we have these huge things and as a

[36:32] senior I you sit there and think, "Okay,

[36:35] where am I going to cut? Do I not take a

[36:37] medicine that I have I need to have

[36:39] because that's cutting into what I have

[36:41] budgeted for the month?"

[36:43] And um

[36:45] and like the other people said that the

[36:47] uh

[36:49] where is the other income coming from

[36:52] all these other people who have moved in

[36:53] and businesses and people

[36:56] and why is that not being compensated,

[36:58] but I agree with a lot of what other

[37:00] people have said.

[37:02] Thank you.

[37:06] » Thank you. And then um we have another

[37:09] attendee.

[37:10] Um I they it looks like they joined from

[37:12] like a phone and so we just have a phone

[37:14] number. So, if they can share their name

[37:17] um before they speak, I um

[37:20] am see why are you not

[37:25] Sorry.

[37:27] Okay, it's not um I can allow them to

[37:30] talk, but it's not allowing me to put

[37:31] them on maybe cuz they don't have a

[37:33] camera cuz they're on a phone. So, I'm

[37:36] going to allow them to talk.

[37:39] You can go ahead. It looks like you are

[37:41] muted, so if you would like to speak.

[37:43] >> Give their name.

[37:44] >> I don't.

[37:45] >> No, no, they need to give their name.

[37:46] >> Yeah, please give your name.

[37:48] >> now?

[37:48] >> You You are.

[37:51] >> Okay, perfect. Uh my name is Derek

[37:53] Andrews. I've been a resident of

[37:55] Saratoga Springs since 2013.

[37:58] And I prepared some words in opposition

[38:01] to the 50% tax increase. Uh good

[38:04] evening, Mayor and council members. I'm

[38:05] here tonight respectfully opposed to the

[38:07] proposed property tax increase. I want

[38:09] to be clear. I support responsible

[38:11] funding for police, fire, roads, and the

[38:13] essential services our growing city

[38:14] needs. My concern is whether a 50%

[38:17] increase in city property tax revenue is

[38:19] necessary right now and whether the city

[38:22] has adequately demonstrated that it is.

[38:24] Saratoga Springs is growing rapidly. The

[38:27] city's own budget documents recognize

[38:29] strong economic and residential growth.

[38:32] Uh record sales tax revenues and

[38:34] continued expansion of the tax base. The

[38:36] city grew by roughly 8% in the most

[38:38] recent year reflected in the budget and

[38:40] substantial additional growth is

[38:41] projected. That growth should matter

[38:43] when we discuss taxation. Before asking

[38:46] existing homeowners to pay significantly

[38:48] more, I believe the city should

[38:49] demonstrate how much additional revenue

[38:51] it can reasonably expect from new

[38:53] construction, new businesses, population

[38:55] growth, sales taxes, and other existing

[38:57] revenue sources.

[38:58] Many homeowners are already struggling

[39:00] with the cost of living and today's

[39:02] housing prices. A home's increasing

[39:04] assessed value may represent wealth on

[39:06] paper, but it isn't cash in a

[39:07] homeowner's bank account. Increasing the

[39:09] tax burden on people simply because

[39:11] their homes have become more valuable

[39:13] can put additional pressure on families

[39:15] who have never actually realized that

[39:16] increase in value.

[39:18] There is another issue I believe

[39:19] deserves attention. Flock license plate

[39:21] reader cameras. The Fourth Amendment

[39:23] protects Americans from unreasonable

[39:24] searches and seizures and organizations

[39:27] such as the ACLU have raised serious

[39:29] concerns about automated license plate

[39:30] surveillance because it is actually

[39:33] surveillance. It is not just a reader.

[39:35] It is meant to surveil and monitor

[39:37] citizens who have not committed a crime

[39:39] nor have reasonable articulable

[39:41] suspicion that they are about to commit

[39:43] a crime.

[39:44] This can put additional pressure Oh,

[39:46] excuse me. I mixed up cuz I needed to

[39:48] add more detail on that. So, this

[39:50] includes

[39:51] uh from this technology includes

[39:52] collection, retention, sharing, and

[39:54] accessibility of location data not only

[39:56] within our own police department but

[39:58] sharing across multiple departments

[40:00] statewide and countrywide. I'm not

[40:02] suggesting that every use of this

[40:03] technology has been ruled

[40:05] unconstitutional. I am saying that

[40:06] residents deserve strong safeguards

[40:09] before government collects detailed

[40:10] information about where people travel. I

[40:12] am uncomfortable therefore asking

[40:15] taxpayers for more money while the city

[40:16] continues funding surveillance

[40:18] technology that raises legitimate

[40:20] constitutional and privacy concerns. I

[40:22] also believe the tax proposal needs to

[40:24] be res-

[40:25] represented more clearly. The city's own

[40:28] property tax impact schedule shows a

[40:30] proposed 3.1 3.1 million dollar

[40:32] increase, but only 1.202 million or

[40:35] 38.78%

[40:37] is identified for police and fire.

[40:39] Although the whole thing was presented

[40:41] as it's for public safety.

[40:44] That means more than 1.89 million or

[40:46] over 61% goes to other areas that are

[40:49] not public safety. They are not police

[40:50] and fire. Those expenditures may be

[40:53] worthwhile.

[40:54] >> Time.

[40:55] >> taxpayers deserve to see that

[40:56] distinction clearly rather than hearing

[40:58] the proposed

[41:02] » Thank you, Derek.

[41:06] Okay, I think we might have a few more

[41:07] in the room who signed up. Um

[41:10] Beth Allen, I believe you already came

[41:12] up, correct?

[41:14] Okay. We've got uh Sammy Reyes.

[41:23] » Hello, my name is Sammy. I'm a homeowner

[41:25] in Saratoga Springs. We uh recently

[41:27] moved over here.

[41:28] Um I'm I'm not opposed to taxes. I understand

[41:32] that expenditure um

[41:35] is needed. I am opposed to the 50% tax

[41:37] increase.

[41:38] What we don't have is I think visibility

[41:40] to where the money is. There are other

[41:43] um

[41:43] uh revenue sources, sales tax, building

[41:46] permit taxes, or uh uh fees,

[41:49] um

[41:50] revenue from traffic fines,

[41:52] um

[41:53] I think

[41:55] my concern, and I don't want to speak

[41:56] for everybody else, but where's that

[41:58] money coming from? How much is that

[41:59] money?

[42:01] Um your your tax base has increased

[42:03] tremendously. Um how much more money are

[42:05] you getting? And this is like the uh

[42:08] I I don't know if there's there's no

[42:10] visibility, and I don't know where to

[42:12] get that. If you can provide that to us

[42:14] for us to understand how much money

[42:16] you're handling and how much money you

[42:19] still need. We also would like to

[42:21] somebody asked a very reasonable

[42:23] question is what other expenses did you

[42:26] cut? Is there is there anything

[42:27] unnecessary or anything you can do less

[42:29] with that's been cut like for example

[42:31] watering concrete.

[42:33] It's a good point. Um

[42:37] The other concern which is a major

[42:38] concern is if this passes, when is your

[42:41] next 50% tax increase going to happen to

[42:44] us?

[42:45] Is that when is enough?

[42:49] Um I believe you as a body, you're

[42:51] trusted to take care of Saratoga

[42:54] Springs.

[42:55] Um

[42:56] and I think the standard is to minimize

[42:59] government, the size of government and

[43:02] the impact of government while providing

[43:05] a good balance to people. Obviously, if

[43:08] we ask you to handle everything that we

[43:09] do, yeah, you're going to need all the

[43:11] money that you do.

[43:13] But we're asking you not to do that.

[43:15] We're just asking for visibility to

[43:17] where the money is, how much money there

[43:19] is and where it's going.

[43:21] Um

[43:24] Sir, you got a bad rap today. I don't

[43:26] know how true that is.

[43:27] I'm sorry for that. I I do support uh

[43:30] law enforcement everywhere. I don't

[43:31] think else is uh

[43:33] is a good idea.

[43:34] Um

[43:36] and

[43:38] uh in conflict with many other people

[43:40] who think that that money is too high. I

[43:42] believe when you consider the salary,

[43:44] the car, the unit, the weapons and the

[43:47] training, I think

[43:49] that might be we might be close to what

[43:51] you're asking for. So, and again, I

[43:53] think uh if there is police brutality,

[43:56] um that's a training issue, not a budget

[43:58] issue.

[43:59] So, thank you.

[44:01] >> Thank you.

[44:03] Do we have any more submitted online?

[44:06] Nicky or Anne?

[44:10] Are there any more on Zoom?

[44:12] Okay, let me check the room again. Is

[44:13] there any more in the room?

[44:21] Could you

[44:23] do one of these in the back, please?

[44:25] Okay.

[44:25] >> Do you want to speak here or there

[44:26] first?

[44:27] >> Go ahead.

[44:28] Just give us your name.

[44:29] >> My name is Jaylin Lincoln and I've been

[44:31] a resident of Saratoga Springs since

[44:32] 1999.

[44:34] And I want to thank this council and the

[44:36] councils that came before you of

[44:38] balancing the needs of services and the

[44:40] increases of taxes. It comes tonight to

[44:43] the age-old question, is it better to do

[44:45] small increments or to go years without

[44:48] before we do a tax raise?

[44:50] It's really hard and I don't have an

[44:51] answer for you, but I do appreciate the

[44:54] time and the effort to have many years

[44:56] of no tax increases.

[44:58] Um we used to joke that we couldn't come

[44:59] out of Costco without spending $100.

[45:02] Unfortunately, the new joke at our house

[45:04] is we can't go to Costco without

[45:05] spending $250.

[45:07] As prices go up, the dollars that were

[45:10] with the original rate

[45:12] in today's market, they just don't

[45:13] purchase as much as they used to and

[45:16] it's a hard question to struggle with,

[45:18] but I appreciate the balance that this

[45:20] city has taken between raising taxes

[45:23] over the last many years um and and

[45:26] providing services and I I hope and wish

[45:30] that there's some magic bullet on either

[45:32] small increments or larger increments.

[45:34] One thing I thought might be helpful is

[45:36] on your paper that was passed out to

[45:38] have the rates of the different cities,

[45:40] what their current rate is and what

[45:41] their proposed rate is because then you

[45:43] can see that oh, it's a 50% increase,

[45:46] but our rate is still lower than a bunch

[45:48] of the cities on the paper. You can

[45:50] compare apples to apples a little better

[45:53] um because the different cities all have

[45:55] different philosophies, slow increments

[45:57] or all at once. But again, I appreciate

[45:59] the the effort that this council has

[46:01] made to keep taxes as low as they can

[46:04] since we moved to Saratoga Springs in

[46:05] '99. Thank you.

[46:09] » Joel, and please don't forget to put

[46:11] your name on there.

[46:13] And are there any more on Zoom?

[46:14] >> There are not.

[46:16] >> Nikki, is there any more emailed in?

[46:17] >> We don't.

[46:19] We do not have any more emails or anyone

[46:21] else on Zoom.

[46:22] >> Okay. Is there anybody else in the room

[46:23] here that would like to participate in

[46:25] the public hearing?

[46:28] Okay. Seeing none, we'll close the

[46:30] public hearing.

[46:35] And we'll go to

[46:38] business item or public hearing item

[46:40] two, consideration of resolution R-2644

[46:44] adopting the certified tax rate for the

[46:46] general revenue fund for fiscal year

[46:47] 2026-2027, Spencer.

[46:50] And council will when after Spencer's

[46:51] done, we'll have time to address

[46:54] um comments.

[46:59] Or ask questions for Spencer.

[47:01] >> Okay.

[47:02] Um so, this resolution here is adopting

[47:05] the property tax rate as part of the

[47:07] fiscal year 2026-2027 budget. Um

[47:11] nothing's really changed since what we

[47:12] said earlier. Were there any questions

[47:14] for staff at this time?

[47:22] » No.

[47:23] >> I I have a question.

[47:24] >> Go ahead. Yeah, council.

[47:25] >> Yeah.

[47:26] >> [clears throat]

[47:27] >> Spencer, um

[47:28] I know that uh staff has put in

[47:32] an untold number of hours

[47:34] uh at the request of

[47:36] city council to make sure that we were

[47:39] uh using the dollars wisely.

[47:41] Um

[47:43] >> [clears throat]

[47:43] >> when um we look at the uh last time that

[47:48] taxes were raised as an absolute dollar

[47:51] amount in in 2008, uh do you have any um

[47:55] idea in the back of your mind or or

[47:57] handy,

[47:58] what inflation has done to the cost of the city

[48:02] and its operations?

[48:04] >> Um, I don't have that handy right now,

[48:06] the inflation since 2008.

[48:08] Um, we could prepare that for you at a

[48:10] different time if you want.

[48:12] >> Well, um,

[48:14] I I I think it'd be safe to say that

[48:16] inflation has had a devastating effect

[48:18] on on the cost of operations in the city

[48:21] over over time. Would that be a fair

[48:24] statement?

[48:24] >> Um, yeah, inflation has been a factor.

[48:27] Um, we had that burst in the early

[48:28] 2020s. Um, I know we had a lot of

[48:30] discussions during that time

[48:32] as how to address that and keep um,

[48:34] the city competitive with staffing and

[48:36] all that. So, yes, it's been a factor.

[48:38] >> So, this has been a a struggle then as

[48:40] long as you've been in the finance

[48:42] department helping to to balance this

[48:45] budget with what the income is coming in

[48:48] from not only existing home, but also

[48:49] new construction. Would that be a fair

[48:51] statement?

[48:52] >> Um, yes, every year we have to go

[48:53] through this discussion and it's always

[48:55] a question of how we can balance the

[48:56] budget and how we can address the city's

[48:58] needs.

[49:00] >> And what is what is the first concern in doing that when you

[49:04] I I know that's an open-ended question,

[49:05] but in balancing the budget, what is the

[49:08] first concern in doing that?

[49:09] >> Uh, generally paying for existing

[49:11] services already, making sure that we

[49:12] don't have to cut anything.

[49:13] >> Okay, thank you.

[49:21] » Um, Spencer, so this when we look at

[49:24] this schedule for the things that will

[49:25] be cut, those are just things this year,

[49:27] correct?

[49:28] >> Yes.

[49:29] >> In this year's budget. So, one thing I

[49:30] want to point out is that people have

[49:32] properly noted that about 1.2 of that

[49:34] goes to public safety this year.

[49:36] But if I'm looking and I'm looking at

[49:38] our budget projections right here,

[49:40] um, we project to spend for for anyone

[49:42] in the audience, uh, I hope this is okay

[49:43] to say, 14.5 million this year on public

[49:46] safety and 17.6 next year, which is a

[49:49] 3.1. A lot of those people are hired

[49:53] after this budget year. So, these are

[49:55] the people that are impacted. Just to

[49:57] clarify it for me, too.

[49:59] >> We've already made a lot of hires. So,

[50:01] these ones right here

[50:02] >> not hired for these positions.

[50:04] >> We have not hired for these, but we've

[50:05] already started staffing for the

[50:07] potential

[50:09] future fire station or as I guess the

[50:11] fire department is calling it the

[50:11] outpost.

[50:13] Um I think correct me if I'm wrong,

[50:15] Chief. You guys already have the

[50:16] ambulance running out of there, right?

[50:18] >> Yeah.

[50:19] So, and that's and that's what I want to

[50:20] clarify for some of the people in the

[50:22] audience. It is true that only 1.2 of

[50:24] this is going to public safety right now

[50:27] in the immediate, but in the next 6 to

[50:29] 12 months, we do plan to hire 22

[50:32] additional firefighter paramedics as

[50:34] well as several more police officers.

[50:36] So, this is

[50:37] um

[50:38] this is ongoing beyond this year these

[50:40] funds.

[50:42] >> If I if I could, um this year the the

[50:45] um

[50:46] the law relative to property tax

[50:48] increases changed. And so, in addition

[50:51] to showing what we are going to use the tax increase for, we are also

[50:56] obligated to show what we we not fund if

[50:59] the tax rate increase did not go

[51:01] through. And so, we looked at the

[51:03] budget. Um as you stated very

[51:06] eloquently, there are some things that

[51:08] we just absolutely have to do. And so,

[51:11] um those are the public safety items.

[51:13] And so, some of the things that would

[51:14] not be funded um they they have nothing

[51:17] to do with the property tax. We're

[51:18] talking about you know, freeing up other

[51:21] revenue streams and other revenue

[51:22] sources by not making those additional

[51:24] expenditures. And we're trying to follow

[51:26] the legislative intent. So, none of the

[51:28] positions that are identified in the

[51:31] alternative budget have been um hired or

[51:34] filled. Those cannot be filled by state

[51:36] law until after our rate is certified um

[51:39] once this evening's uh

[51:40] process goes through. So, fundamentally,

[51:43] um we we did show a a of things that are

[51:45] not public safety related. But public

[51:48] safety, we generate about $6 million a

[51:50] year currently in property tax.

[51:53] As you indicated, it's about $14 million

[51:55] in this year's expenditures, and it's

[51:56] going to go up another $3 million next

[51:58] year. So, fundamentally, the property

[52:00] taxes that we are increasing are only a

[52:02] small portion of what public safety fees

[52:04] will be, and they will continue to grow

[52:07] as we

[52:08] fully staff the fire station in coming

[52:10] years, as well as add additional police

[52:11] officers.

[52:12] >> Thank you for clarifying.

[52:14] >> Just to reiterate, that does not mean

[52:16] that we're going to raise taxes again to

[52:17] meet that, right, Mark? Okay. Just

[52:20] wanted to clarify that. Um

[52:22] >> [clears throat]

[52:23] >> Thank you for coming. Thank you for

[52:25] participating in this. I know there are

[52:26] some people that are

[52:28] for it and against it.

[52:31] I see some uh gentleman in the back

[52:32] wearing an America 250.

[52:38] It's a beautiful place to live.

[52:40] We have the freedoms to do this and

[52:41] discuss as citizens.

[52:44] I get some of you aren't happy.

[52:46] I wasn't happy when we first started

[52:48] talking about this. We And there's

[52:52] it was a hard decision, you know, as

[52:54] some people were for and we you know, we

[52:57] counseled back and forth. We went to

[52:58] staff.

[52:59] We did look at budgets and what we could

[53:02] trim.

[53:04] Some of you

[53:05] have stressed that you're not as in for

[53:09] you don't have the information in front

[53:10] of you that that you would like to have.

[53:13] Um I think we can work on that.

[53:17] Um it might be after the vote, but it at

[53:20] least we can get you the information

[53:21] that you need. You're the public, you

[53:23] deserve it. So, we will

[53:25] do we'll do something to get you that

[53:27] information. At least maybe I can't, but

[53:30] we can ask staff to do that.

[53:35] People up here are citizens of this

[53:37] city, too.

[53:38] We don't go home and cross the

[53:41] Saratoga Springs and leave to another

[53:42] community. This is our community.

[53:45] I've talked with several people that are

[53:47] on fixed incomes.

[53:49] I've talked to people that

[53:52] you know, when they first heard the 50%

[53:53] it was higher

[53:55] and we've reduced that. So,

[53:58] why Lance? Why why are we doing this?

[54:00] Um

[54:02] we provided a lot of information. If you

[54:04] don't have the information, once again,

[54:05] we'll work on that.

[54:07] But, I want to let you know we did hear

[54:09] you this exercise tonight.

[54:13] It it was hard. It's it's hard hearing

[54:16] people that you live with, that you see

[54:17] at the store, that you

[54:19] um

[54:20] It's it's Yeah, anyway, I

[54:23] not an easy discussion to have, but I'm

[54:25] glad we're having it.

[54:27] It's something that I think we we need

[54:30] to celebrate that we've been here I've

[54:31] been here in the city for over 25 years.

[54:35] Um the fact that we haven't raised taxes

[54:37] in over 18 years is amazing and I want

[54:40] to applaud the previous councils

[54:43] and everything that got us to where we

[54:45] are.

[54:46] That's different than now. It's a little

[54:48] bit of a different story because of some

[54:50] other in

[54:52] things that have come up because our

[54:53] society has changed. If you look at some

[54:55] of the If you get down to the bare bones

[54:58] of what the police and fire department

[55:00] do, do

[55:01] the calls per citizen, the calls per

[55:03] officer, the calls per

[55:06] employee have gone up.

[55:09] And I think we can bear that in our

[55:11] empirical data.

[55:13] Our society has changed. It's not the

[55:14] society that we were a couple years ago.

[55:16] We have a lot of

[55:19] needs that are rising and coming to

[55:22] fruition because of our society. So, I

[55:25] want to let you know it's not the same

[55:28] culture that it was 20 years ago or 18

[55:30] years ago or 10 years ago. It's changed

[55:32] and

[55:33] we have to have

[55:36] the the responders there to deal with

[55:38] it.

[55:39] Um once again, my vote

[55:42] tonight I was

[55:44] you know, if you would talk to me a

[55:45] couple days ago, it was here or there.

[55:48] And I've counseled with other council

[55:49] members and

[55:51] >> [clears throat]

[55:51] >> um

[55:53] anyway, if you ever want to talk to me

[55:54] afterwards, my public information is

[55:56] there. I would love to talk to you

[55:58] individually or as a group and

[56:01] explain that and anyway,

[56:03] I'm done.

[56:04] Thanks.

[56:08] » Wait.

[56:09] Anybody else before me? Okay. Um I just

[56:11] want to make sure and I know this was

[56:12] brought up lots of times and it might

[56:13] not look like um this is how it worked,

[56:16] but uh hopefully

[56:18] people are aware that um we're

[56:22] this was definitely a data-driven

[56:23] decision. Um

[56:26] we have a lot of very good data in

[56:28] Saratoga Springs. Um our city manager

[56:30] made sure that we had all those numbers

[56:32] and that we needed to be able to um

[56:35] discuss and talk and um come to a

[56:38] determination, but uh

[56:40] we had massive amounts of data that we

[56:43] reviewed and talked about and looked

[56:44] over to be to make this decision. Um

[56:48] So, uh we obviously

[56:51] uh our discussions were not done

[56:53] lightly. Of course, this was a uh

[56:55] heavy discussion every time. Um but it

[56:57] was very uh it was data-driven. Um I

[57:00] just want to make sure people know that.

[57:01] I know that was it came up um in quite a

[57:03] few comments and stuff like that. Um but

[57:05] we have data. We do have that data um

[57:08] to back up what we're trying to um

[57:10] accomplish with this increase. And so, I

[57:13] just wanted to just to make sure that we

[57:16] are we uh

[57:18] we we did look at a lot of it and it it

[57:20] did help us in our decisions on that.

[57:21] So.

[57:26] » I might not be that short. Sorry.

[57:27] Um thank you so much for coming. First

[57:29] of all, thank you so much for your

[57:31] comments for and against.

[57:33] Um they're very reasonable. They're very

[57:35] um

[57:36] important. Um I want to clarify a couple

[57:39] things that I took notes on if I can.

[57:41] Um again, like

[57:43] $1.2 million is shown here to go to

[57:45] public safety right now, but in the next

[57:48] year, [snorts] in the next 12 to 18

[57:50] months, 100% of those funds will be

[57:52] going to public safety. Um they will not

[57:54] be used. Again,

[57:55] >> [snorts]

[57:55] >> we take home about $6 million in sales

[57:57] tax or in property tax right now. We

[58:00] spent 14.5 this year. So, we're

[58:03] subsidizing the rest of the sales tax.

[58:04] We will continue to do that.

[58:07] Um

[58:08] I'm new to city council. I um I've

[58:10] looked over the budget a lot of times

[58:12] being new, uh line by line by line. And

[58:15] what I found over and over again is a

[58:18] really lean city, very efficient. Um we

[58:21] reuse equipment that I sometimes

[58:22] question whether we should we should

[58:23] reuse. We use every strategy I have

[58:25] found to save money where we can find.

[58:28] We're actually one of the only cities in

[58:29] the Wasatch Front that charges the

[58:31] full cost of water rates to developers,

[58:35] which saves residents money. So, we have

[58:36] the lowest water some of the lowest

[58:38] water rates

[58:39] um

[58:40] on the Wasatch Front.

[58:42] And in the budget, there's a lot of

[58:43] department requests that get denied. So,

[58:44] you're seeing the things that got

[58:46] approved, but you're not seeing all the

[58:47] things that got denied. And we have seen

[58:49] a lot of those.

[58:51] Um

[58:52] I think there's a lot of questions

[58:54] around how things are funded. The

[58:55] primary two ways that cities can fund

[58:59] public safety is property tax and sales

[59:01] tax. Um our property tax, as we know, is

[59:04] not even covering half of our public

[59:06] safety cost. Our sales tax has been

[59:08] enough to do that for many years, but

[59:11] it's

[59:12] but we're facing some headwinds.

[59:14] Um there's some proprietary information

[59:16] that I can't say in a public meeting,

[59:19] um but we do have some things that will

[59:21] make it difficult, specifically with

[59:23] this large increase in our firefighting

[59:25] force,

[59:26] to do that. Um but just some numbers

[59:28] that I can share.

[59:30] 2024 we spent 9.8 [clears throat]

[59:32] million in public and combined fire and

[59:35] police.

[59:36] Then it was 12.3, um 14.5. And a lot of

[59:39] this is because it's a really

[59:40] competitive market. We just did um

[59:44] a retirement tier two retirement pick up

[59:47] like a couple weeks ago for our police

[59:49] and fire to better recruit more people.

[59:51] We want the best, most experienced

[59:53] people coming to our city, and I think

[59:55] that's really important.

[59:56] Uh and that costs money.

[59:58] Um

[59:59] and so uh property tax also with the

[1:00:02] certified tax rate as your rate

[1:00:04] as your values go up, the rate goes

[1:00:07] down. Um that's something I didn't

[1:00:09] understand

[1:00:10] before um running for city council.

[1:00:13] And so that doesn't ever account for

[1:00:15] inflation. So we haven't raised property

[1:00:17] taxes in 18 years. I do appreciate lower

[1:00:19] rates, but that's 18 years of inflation

[1:00:21] um that we are considering and trying to

[1:00:24] deal with as we try to keep tax rates

[1:00:27] low. So

[1:00:29] um one other quick clarification or two.

[1:00:33] I believe the city has two Flock cameras

[1:00:35] that we are transitioning away from. Is

[1:00:36] that true?

[1:00:39] The rest are on private property.

[1:00:40] >> locations.

[1:00:41] >> Two locations and we are transitioning

[1:00:43] away. So that resident can rest happy

[1:00:45] that we are trying not to use Flock

[1:00:47] cameras in the future.

[1:00:48] >> we'll be done with them by October.

[1:00:50] >> October. Okay.

[1:00:51] So those will be gone by October. I

[1:00:52] appreciate that is something the privacy

[1:00:55] I think is valid. Um we will not be

[1:00:58] doing that. Um

[1:01:00] and

[1:01:01] there was another question about tax

[1:01:03] breaks to businesses and I'm so happy to

[1:01:05] report that that is something that

[1:01:06] Saratoga Springs does not do.

[1:01:08] Um we have given one tax the previous

[1:01:10] city council gave one tax incentive to

[1:01:13] get Costco that is fully paid for. We do

[1:01:15] not have tax incentives which is pretty

[1:01:17] rare for our surrounding city. Is that

[1:01:19] correct?

[1:01:20] >> That's correct.

[1:01:21] >> Okay.

[1:01:21] So just just because I think are

[1:01:23] valuable things for people to know. We

[1:01:25] really hear you. I really hear you.

[1:01:28] Ultimately, I really ran my campaign on

[1:01:31] public safety because I had looked at

[1:01:33] the numbers

[1:01:34] before I decided to run for office and I

[1:01:36] thought it was really important that the

[1:01:38] city fund this.

[1:01:40] >> [clears throat]

[1:01:40] >> I lived in fire prone areas before. I'm

[1:01:43] very cognizant of what that does. I just

[1:01:44] spent

[1:01:46] 4 extra hours driving to Oregon to avoid

[1:01:49] fires 2 weeks ago

[1:01:51] and I just think that we cannot

[1:01:53] compromise on public safety and it is so

[1:01:55] important and

[1:01:57] I wish there was a way to help people on

[1:01:58] fixed incomes not feel the burden of

[1:02:00] this.

[1:02:01] I prefer smaller increases when

[1:02:04] possible, but I really think that this

[1:02:06] increase is necessary for the stability

[1:02:08] and safety of our residents. So, we are asking for a significant

[1:02:16] investment from our community.

[1:02:18] Here, we're asking for $3.1 million and

[1:02:20] I want to clarify that it is only the

[1:02:23] portion of your city taxes, which

[1:02:25] currently accounts for about 12% of your

[1:02:28] taxes that are going to is going to be

[1:02:30] raised with this. On the average home

[1:02:33] that is

[1:02:34] around $142,000,

[1:02:37] that equals to about $12 per month.

[1:02:42] $12 is $12.

[1:02:44] In some

[1:02:46] budgets, family budgets, that's a

[1:02:47] little. In some families, that's a lot.

[1:02:51] I want to make sure that you get the

[1:02:53] most value for your $12, for whatever it

[1:02:56] is that you're paying for this.

[1:02:58] Some of the data that we looked at is we

[1:03:02] are building a new fire station. We're

[1:03:04] building that new fire station because

[1:03:07] there's a portion of our city

[1:03:09] that the response times are over 10

[1:03:12] minutes.

[1:03:14] The target is around 5 minutes. If

[1:03:16] you've ever

[1:03:18] been on the receiving end of one of

[1:03:20] those calls

[1:03:21] and you're you're it's a life and death

[1:03:23] situation, you know how long 1 minute

[1:03:26] is.

[1:03:27] And so, part of your investment in

[1:03:30] public safety

[1:03:31] is bringing those response times down.

[1:03:34] That is really important. Um

[1:03:37] mutual aid

[1:03:39] Previously, we've been relying on our

[1:03:41] neighbors a lot.

[1:03:43] We've been They've have answered the

[1:03:45] call to help neighbor some of our

[1:03:46] neighbors

[1:03:48] more than we've been able to do that.

[1:03:50] With this, we'll be able to balance

[1:03:51] that. We will be better able to serve

[1:03:54] our own citizens.

[1:03:56] Um

[1:03:58] We want these new

[1:04:00] We will be getting 24 new firefighters

[1:04:03] and six new police officers.

[1:04:05] We want to make sure that they are well

[1:04:07] equipped and well trained.

[1:04:10] Um so, that is my focus. Is I understand

[1:04:12] that this is a big ask from our

[1:04:14] community. I understand that it does

[1:04:17] require sacrifice from from some people.

[1:04:21] Um

[1:04:21] and some some of the family budgets and

[1:04:23] that is that is a strain. So, our

[1:04:26] commitment is to make sure that we give

[1:04:28] you as much value for that dollar as

[1:04:29] possible.

[1:04:33] » Okay.

[1:04:35] Mayor, I do have just I was the first to

[1:04:38] go. I do have some follow-up because

[1:04:40] there are a lot of good points that were

[1:04:42] made. Um

[1:04:43] and I'd asked a an open-ended question

[1:04:45] to Spencer and I'd like to come back and

[1:04:47] address that now.

[1:04:50] Um

[1:04:52] there were choices and there have been

[1:04:53] choices made. Um

[1:04:55] and one of those choices that the city

[1:04:57] council

[1:04:59] had made was to reduce the potential

[1:05:02] merit increase for city staff by 20%.

[1:05:06] Um

[1:05:07] we hated doing that.

[1:05:09] But we felt we needed to um try to

[1:05:12] contain the costs as as much as possible

[1:05:15] because

[1:05:16] even though it's going to cost me about

[1:05:17] $13 port $13 more per month, I said um

[1:05:23] money in my pocket or your pocket is it

[1:05:25] does more good than than money in city

[1:05:27] coffers. Problem is is that our coffers

[1:05:30] can't uh aren't sufficient to handle

[1:05:33] what is needed. And the problem with not

[1:05:36] um

[1:05:37] doing a tax increase in in 18 years is

[1:05:42] that devil that is called inflation.

[1:05:45] And if you look at the cost of

[1:05:47] materials, um they've gone up. Well, is

[1:05:50] it really the cost of materials that

[1:05:52] have gone up? No. It's the value of the

[1:05:54] dollar has dropped by 55%.

[1:05:57] And the the problem with that is that

[1:06:00] >> [clears throat]

[1:06:00] >> your operational costs or our

[1:06:02] operational costs have inflated faster

[1:06:04] than than the CPI. And so, especially

[1:06:07] when it comes to asphalt, concrete, and

[1:06:08] everything that is needed to maintain

[1:06:11] our existing uh infrastructure, yes, new construction pays for all of that,

[1:06:16] but we do have existing infrastructure

[1:06:18] that needs to be maintained.

[1:06:21] The real problem is uh under the

[1:06:22] certified Utah certified tax rate is it

[1:06:25] automatically adjusts down to maintain

[1:06:27] revenue neutrality as home prices go or

[1:06:29] home values go up. So, the existing

[1:06:32] property tax collections don't

[1:06:34] automatically adjust for inflation. Um

[1:06:37] and that's where we get the the problem

[1:06:39] where we've been doing uh what we can

[1:06:42] with the increase in homes and

[1:06:44] businesses that have come into the uh

[1:06:47] into the city. So,

[1:06:50] you can have a strategy inflation uh to

[1:06:52] offset these inflationary losses without

[1:06:54] raising property taxes by

[1:06:56] um sales tax growth. And we've seen

[1:06:58] substantial sales tax growth. Of course,

[1:07:00] some of that's going to leave our city

[1:07:01] now with the opening of Walmart in Eagle

[1:07:03] Mountain and and in Lehi. But they it is

[1:07:06] volatile. Um and the other is the

[1:07:09] revenue from the new residential uh

[1:07:11] developments will help short-term cash

[1:07:13] flows, and it has. But, each new

[1:07:15] subdivision adds long-term maintenance

[1:07:17] uh burdens, more miles, roads, pipes,

[1:07:19] more emergency calls, and we've seen

[1:07:21] that with our emergency calls.

[1:07:23] As uh

[1:07:24] >> [clears throat]

[1:07:25] >> Council member Davenport Port uh

[1:07:27] Davenport pointed out that uh

[1:07:30] 11 uh almost 11 minutes, it's over 10,

[1:07:34] is uh

[1:07:35] is is insufficient. For each minute that

[1:07:37] goes by, um Chief Johnson uh had

[1:07:40] testified earlier uh in a prior Council

[1:07:43] meeting that it's a potential life lost,

[1:07:45] and I've had the uh unfortunate position

[1:07:48] to be in a home where someone's not

[1:07:50] breathing and making the decision on

[1:07:53] what to do there, and every second felt

[1:07:56] like a uh tick in my brain, you know, as

[1:07:58] my heartbeat, until they got there.

[1:08:01] The problem is is that uh as Jolene

[1:08:04] Lincoln had pointed out is that the old

[1:08:06] joke, and my wife and I had that joke

[1:08:08] that

[1:08:09] try to get out of a Costco for $100, and

[1:08:11] now it's $200.

[1:08:13] Um that is the true problem with

[1:08:16] inflation and and what we're trying to

[1:08:18] do here, I believe, is to um

[1:08:21] make that correction and and move

[1:08:23] forward.

[1:08:24] If we have to have changes in future

[1:08:27] years, which I based on the projections,

[1:08:29] that should not need to happen anytime

[1:08:32] soon. I think that was a concern, are we

[1:08:33] going to do it year after year after

[1:08:35] year? This is right-siding um our budget

[1:08:38] uh and on this one time, and it does

[1:08:41] come at a cost, but uh we've we've cut

[1:08:43] as much as we possibly can, in my mind.

[1:08:46] I don't believe I don't like to have see

[1:08:48] costs increase for myself, but uh um

[1:08:51] unfortunately, I'm I'm a I'm

[1:08:53] unfortunately, this is something that we

[1:08:55] have to do.

[1:08:58] >> Okay, thank you. I'm going to talk about

[1:08:59] our our process a little bit. So, if you

[1:09:00] haven't been to a public meeting,

[1:09:02] we have public comment and and public

[1:09:04] hearings, and we we don't have a

[1:09:06] back-and-forth exchange. So, some of the

[1:09:08] questions we try and answer

[1:09:10] after the fact. Um some of these have

[1:09:13] been touched on. These are just some of

[1:09:14] my notes. I wanted to touch on these.

[1:09:16] So, first, the certified tax rate.

[1:09:19] If you're not familiar with how

[1:09:20] certified tax rate works in Utah, and

[1:09:22] staff, keep me honest.

[1:09:24] Every year, the county

[1:09:26] um

[1:09:27] not the auditor,

[1:09:29] >> Assessor.

[1:09:29] >> The county Thank you. The county

[1:09:30] assessor will look at the overall value

[1:09:33] of Saratoga Springs houses and

[1:09:35] businesses for property tax purpose.

[1:09:39] They then assign a tax rate

[1:09:42] to every entity that pays into property

[1:09:45] tax.

[1:09:47] In order for the city of Saratoga

[1:09:48] Springs to collect more money,

[1:09:51] the certified tax rate has to be

[1:09:53] adjusted through truth and truth and

[1:09:54] taxation.

[1:09:56] So, when I look at my personal property

[1:09:59] tax bill

[1:10:00] for the city of Saratoga Springs,

[1:10:05] I paid more to the city 10 years ago

[1:10:08] than I do prior to today

[1:10:12] because

[1:10:13] our growth has brought the tax rate

[1:10:15] down, so the city collects the same

[1:10:18] amount of money. Spencer, am I am I

[1:10:20] hitting that right?

[1:10:21] >> So, new growth is added to that number.

[1:10:23] So, for this year, for example, we would

[1:10:25] be adding for approximately $500,000 in

[1:10:27] new property tax revenue from new

[1:10:30] housing, new businesses being built.

[1:10:31] >> Right. Correct. Okay. So, that's the

[1:10:33] certified tax rate. And we've been able

[1:10:35] to manage We in 18 years,

[1:10:37] we've gone from a volunteer, well,

[1:10:40] part-time fire department. Correct. 18

[1:10:43] years ago. To now being a fully staffed,

[1:10:45] full-time department where I think we

[1:10:46] have two part-time employees in our in

[1:10:49] our firefighting service. So, we've been

[1:10:51] able to manage that growth over the 18

[1:10:54] year over those 18 years using new

[1:10:56] growth.

[1:10:58] The new fire department that needs to be

[1:10:59] built, um

[1:11:01] that will be handled through new growth.

[1:11:04] That's not part of what this ask is. So,

[1:11:07] we can use the question was brought up

[1:11:08] on impact fees. So, when a new home is

[1:11:11] built, impact fees are collected and we

[1:11:13] can use those impact fees to build the

[1:11:16] new fire station. What we can't use

[1:11:18] impact fees for are for the ongoing

[1:11:20] costs of personnel.

[1:11:22] We've been able to grow city staff

[1:11:24] with the growth of the city through new

[1:11:27] growth of new residents and new

[1:11:29] businesses and new sales tax.

[1:11:31] This particular year, and the reason

[1:11:33] this has come up is because we have kind

[1:11:36] of an anomaly. We have to hire a large

[1:11:38] amount of new employees to house the new

[1:11:41] fire station

[1:11:43] and and support the uh additional police

[1:11:45] required. And so, the the increase is

[1:11:51] fully going towards partially funding

[1:11:55] the public safety

[1:11:56] cost that we incur.

[1:11:59] Uh and it's just the the personnel, it's

[1:12:01] not the the fire station. Uh the

[1:12:03] question was brought up on on tax

[1:12:05] incentives and uh Council member Wilson

[1:12:07] talked about this.

[1:12:08] There's only been one incentive in the

[1:12:11] history of Saratoga Springs and it was

[1:12:12] Costco. It was about a 10-year deal and

[1:12:15] it was done in it was paid off in 7

[1:12:17] years and it was not a property tax

[1:12:20] incentive. It was a performance-based

[1:12:23] sales tax incentive.

[1:12:25] So, they received a portion of sales tax

[1:12:28] collected

[1:12:29] from sales at Costco back until they hit a certain number and that we

[1:12:34] projected about a 10-year payoff. It was

[1:12:35] done in about 7 and 1/2 years.

[1:12:38] And we don't have any other

[1:12:40] um

[1:12:41] commercial or um

[1:12:43] residential incentives that we're

[1:12:45] looking at in the future at this time.

[1:12:49] Um other revenue sources, so this is

[1:12:52] something I had to learn early on uh

[1:12:54] when I was on the council.

[1:12:56] When you look at an overall city budget,

[1:12:59] a lot of the money that goes into a city

[1:13:01] budget is is already earmarked and

[1:13:05] um

[1:13:06] dedicated towards the expenses that it

[1:13:09] has to be per state code. So, when we

[1:13:11] look at impact fees,

[1:13:12] uh we can't collect impact fees and pay

[1:13:15] for things that are not intended for.

[1:13:17] And those have to be proven

[1:13:19] through impact fee studies

[1:13:21] um

[1:13:22] that the impact fees collected are going

[1:13:25] to pay for the impact of that growth.

[1:13:28] And we get audited on that by the state

[1:13:30] um to make sure that we are not over

[1:13:32] collecting on impact fees and using them

[1:13:33] for other things.

[1:13:35] And then my final note was on budget

[1:13:37] documents. Uh if you go to the city

[1:13:39] website and you just type in the search

[1:13:41] window budget documents, you'll find a

[1:13:43] couple documents. One, there's about a

[1:13:45] I don't want to guess about a 300-page

[1:13:47] document that's the complete city budget

[1:13:49] and it's there for every year. And then

[1:13:51] there's about a seven-page um

[1:13:54] Huh?

[1:13:54] >> Citizen budget.

[1:13:55] yeah. That for me is

[1:13:57] frankly much easier to understand than

[1:13:58] the but the the larger budget document

[1:14:01] does go through line by line

[1:14:03] uh department by by department on

[1:14:05] uh where every all the spending and all

[1:14:07] the revenue is.

[1:14:09] Okay, are there any other

[1:14:11] questions or comments? Mark, I think you

[1:14:12] might have one.

[1:14:13] >> I just wanted to provide a bit of

[1:14:14] information. Uh there's been several

[1:14:15] questions about new growth. Um I only

[1:14:17] have 16 years worth of data here, but if

[1:14:19] you think of 2009 and 2008, there was

[1:14:23] not a whole lot of new growth happening

[1:14:24] in Saratoga Springs because the market

[1:14:26] collapsed in '27. Uh you know, around uh

[1:14:29] 2007, sorry. Um on average across those

[1:14:33] 16 years, the city has collected

[1:14:35] $266,051

[1:14:38] in new growth over that 16-year window.

[1:14:41] So, some years it was higher, other

[1:14:42] years it was only um

[1:14:45] $2,511

[1:14:47] of new growth in 2011. So, so what we're

[1:14:50] talking about is is over that duration

[1:14:52] of time about a quarter of a million

[1:14:54] dollars a year in new growth tax value

[1:14:56] that has grown for the city. So, again,

[1:15:00] a lot of questions that have been around

[1:15:01] that,

[1:15:02] but but that's the that's the numeric

[1:15:04] growth of what new growth has been over

[1:15:06] that time period.

[1:15:08] >> I think just a couple more comments.

[1:15:10] Yeah,

[1:15:11] over here first.

[1:15:12] >> That's great. I just wanted to say thank

[1:15:14] you.

[1:15:15] When I talk about data data-driven

[1:15:16] decisions from what everybody said that

[1:15:18] that's how we do that. So, I want to I

[1:15:21] want to tell my fellow council members

[1:15:22] thank you for responding to all those

[1:15:24] questions about the data and what we use

[1:15:26] and kind of the why behind everything.

[1:15:28] Hopefully that's helpful

[1:15:31] to everybody why the why behind that

[1:15:33] with our with the data that we have for

[1:15:35] that and just everybody who's here,

[1:15:37] everybody's online, anybody please if

[1:15:38] you still have questions reach out to

[1:15:40] us. Appreciate you guys coming. That's

[1:15:41] what how the process works and we love

[1:15:43] it and it and

[1:15:45] I I hope we hope we answer a lot of your

[1:15:47] questions.

[1:15:49] Like we like mayor said we can't have

[1:15:50] the back and forth at this meeting, but

[1:15:52] we still love to have those. So, please

[1:15:54] reach out if you want to, but thank you

[1:15:56] again for my fellow council members for

[1:15:57] bringing out that date. Kind of a little

[1:15:59] bit of the data that we you know that we

[1:16:00] had in front of us that we could go off

[1:16:02] of.

[1:16:04] » Yep.

[1:16:05] >> Yeah, and also staff keep me honest as

[1:16:07] well. Um

[1:16:08] I wanted to address a little bit of the

[1:16:11] new growth that I found kind of

[1:16:12] interesting. So, the cost of public

[1:16:15] safety per household is just under

[1:16:17] $1,000 a year, 900 to 1,000

[1:16:19] [clears throat]

[1:16:19] if we're at least as similar to

[1:16:21] comparable cities.

[1:16:23] I was looking at a similar size city

[1:16:25] just north of us that

[1:16:27] charges the full cost of public safety

[1:16:29] fire and police to their residents and

[1:16:30] they're spending 947 a year

[1:16:33] for that. We're probably a little bit

[1:16:35] leaner than they are. We might be a

[1:16:36] little bit under that, but let's say

[1:16:37] 900. Um currently the median household

[1:16:40] spends $261 in property tax a year.

[1:16:44] So, the rest of that is subsidized

[1:16:45] through sales tax. Commercial pays a

[1:16:47] little bit more.

[1:16:49] Um 45% more. Um so, every time a new

[1:16:52] house is built, we are subsidizing more

[1:16:55] of the cost of their public service. So,

[1:16:58] even though we are collecting more

[1:16:59] revenue, we are not collecting enough

[1:17:01] revenue. We're hoping um in the past,

[1:17:04] Saratoga Springs has paid about half

[1:17:06] property tax, half sales tax towards

[1:17:09] public safety costs. We're now down to a

[1:17:12] point where projected, if we don't pass

[1:17:14] this tax increase, next year we'll be

[1:17:16] paying 1/3 property tax, 2/3 sales tax.

[1:17:20] We're just hoping to get it back up to

[1:17:22] that that halfway, that 50% level,

[1:17:25] because we believe that's better for the

[1:17:26] stable future. Um if there is a

[1:17:28] recession and the economy crashes, we

[1:17:30] don't have to lay off

[1:17:33] firefighters.

[1:17:34] Um and that that is that is where I come

[1:17:36] down on this decision is when I think

[1:17:37] about growth helps and it also adds

[1:17:40] costs. And so, balancing that and making

[1:17:43] sure that our growth is um sufficiently

[1:17:46] helping with those costs is one of the

[1:17:47] concerns I've had, because

[1:17:49] the especially the sales tax fund is it

[1:17:52] needs to be I do want the library to be

[1:17:54] funded. I do want us to have recreation

[1:17:56] and parks and I was too late signing up

[1:17:58] my kid for for soccer and you know, I I

[1:18:01] get the stress of parents in that

[1:18:03] situation and I do want us to have a

[1:18:05] quality of life and we do want to

[1:18:06] balance that and keep subsidizing with

[1:18:09] sales tax, so we're not paying so

[1:18:11] residents aren't paying the full cost,

[1:18:13] especially people on low incomes,

[1:18:15] especially people with fixed incomes.

[1:18:16] So, this is this decision is just how do

[1:18:19] we balance that? Um how do we come to I

[1:18:22] we really went back and forth on

[1:18:24] what the right number was. Do we want to

[1:18:26] try to, you know,

[1:18:28] go higher, go lower, go over years.

[1:18:31] It is a hard decision, no matter how you

[1:18:33] do it. Um I do you we're really trying

[1:18:36] to balance

[1:18:38] keeping the budget really stable

[1:18:40] in a really fast-growing city that we

[1:18:42] can't always control the growth of while

[1:18:45] we are actually, I think, the 12th

[1:18:47] largest city in the state, maybe the

[1:18:48] 13th at this point. Um we're we're we're

[1:18:51] up there. And when I moved in, I think

[1:18:53] we were like number 26. That was 5 years

[1:18:55] ago. Um so we're we really want to be

[1:18:58] able to provide services

[1:19:00] while keeping taxes as low, and I I'm

[1:19:02] not sure if we've threaded the needle

[1:19:03] perfectly, but we that is what I am

[1:19:05] trying to do here.

[1:19:07] >> Okay, Council any other comments?

[1:19:10] If not, I'll entertain a motion on

[1:19:11] business on public hearing item number

[1:19:13] two.

[1:19:17] Oh, I'm sorry.

[1:19:18] On business item

[1:19:20] uh action item two.

[1:19:22] Thank you, Kevin.

[1:19:28] Motion on action item number two.

[1:19:32] » Uh um

[1:19:33] I move that we consider the resolution

[1:19:35] R-26-44

[1:19:37] dated today

[1:19:39] adopting the certified tax rate for the

[1:19:41] general revenue fund for the fiscal year

[1:19:42] 2026-2027.

[1:19:45] >> Approve or consider? You said consider.

[1:19:47] >> Oh, sorry. I move that we approve

[1:19:50] resolution R-26-44 dated today adopting

[1:19:53] the certified tax rate for the general

[1:19:54] rep

[1:19:55] revenue fund for the fiscal year

[1:19:56] 2026-2027.

[1:19:58] >> Okay. I've got a first from

[1:19:59] Councilmember Wilson.

[1:20:02] » Second.

[1:20:03] from Councilmember Davenport.

[1:20:04] We'll We'll do a roll call vote of the

[1:20:06] Council.

[1:20:07] Councilmember Wadman?

[1:20:08] >> Yes.

[1:20:09] >> Councilmember Barton?

[1:20:10] >> Yes.

[1:20:10] >> Councilmember Davenport?

[1:20:12] >> Yes.

[1:20:12] >> Councilmember Taylor?

[1:20:13] >> Yes.

[1:20:14] >> Councilmember Wilson?

[1:20:15] >> Yes.

[1:20:16] >> Okay, that resolution passes. We'll go

[1:20:17] to public hearing

[1:20:19] item three.

[1:20:21] Public hearing for the City of Saratoga

[1:20:22] Springs final fiscal year 2026-2027

[1:20:25] budget. Presentation of the FY2026-2027

[1:20:29] final budget. Spencer.

[1:20:31] >> Okay. Um

[1:20:33] So this year was a little bit different

[1:20:34] as we've explained before due to the

[1:20:36] property tax. We um normally most years

[1:20:39] we adopt the final budget in May or

[1:20:41] June. Um but due to the property tax

[1:20:44] changes this year

[1:20:46] um we cannot adopt a final budget till

[1:20:49] the new property tax is certified. Um

[1:20:52] and so now that we have a certified tax

[1:20:54] rate um the council can now uh make

[1:20:58] actual

[1:20:59] uh action on the budget and adopt a

[1:21:01] final budget. What we have right now

[1:21:02] since we're already into the fiscal year

[1:21:04] we're operating on an interim budget is

[1:21:05] what it's called.

[1:21:06] And so month and a half of interim um

[1:21:10] council tonight can make an action so

[1:21:11] decide uh to do final budget. Um

[1:21:14] we presented it multiple times. There's

[1:21:15] been no changes to the final budget. Um

[1:21:19] the major changes are mostly concerning

[1:21:22] public safety um with also some other

[1:21:24] changes concerning library and public

[1:21:26] works as well. Any questions for staff

[1:21:27] at this time?

[1:21:30] » No, this is a public hearing so I'll

[1:21:32] open the public hearing

[1:21:33] for

[1:21:36] I got too many pieces of paper action

[1:21:38] item No, public hearing item number

[1:21:40] three.

[1:21:42] Uh please be respectful in your

[1:21:43] comments. Please limit comments to three

[1:21:45] minutes. Time may not be given to

[1:21:46] another commenter. Please avoid

[1:21:48] repetitive comments. Is anybody here for

[1:21:50] public hearing item three?

[1:21:56] Okay, seeing none I'll close public

[1:21:58] comment and turn it over to the council

[1:21:59] for questions.

[1:22:05] Seeing none I'll entertain a motion on

[1:22:07] public hearing item number three.

[1:22:10] » I

[1:22:11] That's just for the public hearing item

[1:22:13] three and then

[1:22:14] >> Four is a consideration

[1:22:16] >> Okay, thank you Kevin.

[1:22:18] So, that is uh that closes out public

[1:22:20] hearing item number three. We'll go to

[1:22:22] uh action item four consideration of

[1:22:24] ordinance 2635

[1:22:26] dated today adopting a final budget for

[1:22:28] FY26-27, including a property tax rate

[1:22:31] increase, compensation schedule for

[1:22:33] elected and statutory officers,

[1:22:35] and compensation increase for defined

[1:22:37] municipal officers.

[1:22:39] >> I move that we

[1:22:40] um

[1:22:40] >> We have Real quick, are there any

[1:22:42] questions on this action item?

[1:22:45] Okay, I'll entertain a motion.

[1:22:46] >> Thank you.

[1:22:47] I move that we approve ordinance number

[1:22:49] 26

[1:22:51] -35, dated today,

[1:22:53] uh ordinance adopting final budget for

[1:22:55] fiscal year 26-27,

[1:22:57] including all property tax rate

[1:22:58] increases, compensation schedules for

[1:23:00] elected and statutory officers, and

[1:23:01] compensation increase for defined

[1:23:03] executive municipal officers.

[1:23:05] >> Thank you. It's got a first from Council

[1:23:07] Member Taylor.

[1:23:10] >> Second.

[1:23:10] >> A second from Council Member Wilson.

[1:23:12] We'll do a roll call vote. Council

[1:23:13] Member Wilson?

[1:23:15] >> Yes.

[1:23:15] >> Wadman?

[1:23:16] >> Yes.

[1:23:16] >> Barton?

[1:23:16] >> Yes.

[1:23:17] >> Davenport?

[1:23:18] >> Yes.

[1:23:18] >> Taylor?

[1:23:19] >> Yes.

[1:23:19] >> Okay, final budget passed unanimous.

[1:23:22] If there uh is there a need for closed

[1:23:24] session tonight?

[1:23:25] >> No.

[1:23:26] need for closed session, so without

[1:23:28] objection,

[1:23:30] we are adjourned.

City Council Meeting - Truth in Taxation 08/11/2026

Transcript