THE STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF SEVIER
CITY OF RICHFIELD
At the City Council
In and for said City
May 12, 2026
Minutes of the Richfield City Council meeting held on Tuesday, May 12, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Richfield City Office Building located at 75 East Center, Richfield, Utah. Mayor Bryan L. Burrows presiding.
- CALL TO ORDER
- OPENING REMARKS
- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
- ROLL CALL
- MINUTES APPROVED
- CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- BUSINESS
a. Tourism presentation
b. Public hearing Enberson
c. Public hearing Winkel
d. Overlay ordinance
e. Budget presentation - OTHER BUSINESS
- ADJOURNMENT
City Council meeting on Tuesday, May 12, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. The agenda shall be as follows: (The agenda may be accelerated, or line items may be discussed in any order.)
- OPENING REMARKS Councilmember Thomas
- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE led by Councilmember Hansen
- ROLL CALL – Councilmembers Brayden Gardner, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen, Kendrick Thomas and Andrew Chappell, Mayor Bryan Burrows (not voting), Finance Director Rob Jenson, City Administrator Michele Jolley. Also, in attendance, Michael Snow, Corey Winkel, Russ Brightwell, Amy Myers, J Glecher, Tim Hunt, Michell Olsen, Elizabeth Steele, Isaac Steel, Alexa Wilson, Carson DeMille, Danielle White, Max White, Tanner Thompson, Trent Lloyd, Keith Mogan and David Anderson.
- MINUTES APPROVED – The Council reviewed the minutes of the meeting held on April 28, 2026. Motion: Approve the minutes of the April 28, 2026, meeting, Action: Approve, Moved by Brayden Gardner, Seconded by Kip Hansen.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen. - EXPENDITURES APPROVED – Consider a motion to approve the warrants and cash disbursements for April 2026. Motion: Approve the warrants and cash disbursements for April 2026, Action: Approve, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Brayden Gardner.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen. - CONFLICT OF INTEREST – No conflicts declared.
- BUSINESS
a. Presentation on County Tourism by Amy Myers. She is over tourism and events in Sevier County and has been for four years.
Myers addressed the council explaining that she is the destination/marketing manager for the County. Her job is to market a landmass and everything you can do in that mass. The branding of the area as Utah’s Trail Country is continuing. She presented a video that is part of a YouTube channel promoting Richfield as a tourism destination. She also showed a website, which was developed with the help of a marketing agency – richfieldutah.com. The Tourism, Recreation, Cultural, Convention, and Airport Facilities Tax Act requires a board to look at tourism dollars and how to best use them to help market the area. Michele Jolley was appointed to the board to represent Richfield City as it is where the majority of Transient Room Tax is generated.
Richfield was the top word that was used when people were trying to find the area. The marketing also includes a new logo, which utilizes the image of a pheasant calling back to the area’s history of once being known as the rooster valley. Myers said they are also being mindful of the agricultural heritage and that it remains a driver of the area. There was a lot that went into the decision to promote what is available.
When looking at marking dollars, 80 percent is required to be spent outside of the state. They have sources of data that are used to determine where people are coming from to help make decisions in how future marketing funds are spent. Tourism based businesses are also an important facet, such as bicycle shuttle companies and fishing guilds at Fish Lake.
They are also looking at marketing to international tourists. They still prioritize new events, such as the PRC rodeo that is being hosted this week.
They have worked with several events supporting the Blackhawk, Fremont Indian State Park and other events. Dark Skies is one of the biggest requested areas in international tourism. Utah is marketed at the “Dark Sky State.” Right now they are looking at hosted events that capitalize on the Dark Sky concept. In one full year of marketing, they have as a county crossed the $1 million mark in what the county brought in in transient room tax money. This means that the area has seen some $8 million brought in.
Councilmember Arrington said one of the data points available to the travel council is the VISA data, which identifies where you spent and how much. Phone data is also used to track how many visitors are.
Councilmember Chappell said he likes what was presented and would like all small businesses in the area to have something similar.
Councilmember Thomas asked what is needed for future expansion – is it more hotel rooms, more amenities, more trails.
Myers said the thing that is missing is guides. The County is DIY. If you don’t have your own machine or equipment, you can’t do the activities. Now there is a mountain bike business that allows for rental of bikes, which gives people access. This allowed an international team to experience the area’s mountain bike trails. There are also guided tours of Pando. They are also doing tours and dark sky events at Fremont Indian State Park. Other businesses are also getting involved, including providing tours of the area, including agriculture operations and mines. It is starting, but it takes someone to take a chance on the tourism. You want an experience where someone is going to teach you how to do it so you can have an experience without fear of the unknown. People know how to fish, but they want to know how to fish this lake specifically.
Mayor Burrows asked if the information the travel council has is available to others, such as a person who is considering building a hotel in the area.
Myers said she has the information available for the local area. The state information is actually processed by a person named Kim Gardner who creates a report that explains how many dollars convert into how many jobs. Much of this information is also available at Utah.travel.gov.
This information is also used when the county tourism applies for grants to pay for the marketing. The data has to be tracked to qualify for grants. Myers said she was not expecting to cross the $1 million mark, which represents 23 percent growth in TRT tax.
Councilmember Hansen asked what the channel on Youtube is called. It is Richfield Utah [@RichfieldUtah]. There are several videos on the channel promoting different attractions in the area.
Houston Holt said his mountain bike shuttling business has seen more than double the clients in the past year. He said there are going to be four different mountain bike races in the County this year.
b. Public hearing to receive comments on a proposed annexation of 6.87 acres of land belonging to Mark Enberson and located at approximately 1000 W 1800 S. Mayor Burrows opened the hearing at 7:36 pm. Hearing no comments, Mayor Burrows closed the hearing at 7:37 pm
c. Public hearing to receive comments on a proposed annexation of 5.33 acres of land belonging to Corey Winkel and located at approximately 650 East 1260 North. Mayor Burrows opened the hearing at 7:38 p.m. Hearing no comments, Mayor Burrows closed the hearing at 7:38 p.m.
d. Consider approving a proposal to move forward with the process to amend the General Plan and text amendments to Title 17 of the Zoning Code and to allow and adopt a missing middle overlay zone for R1-10 zoning for SITLA’s 20+ acres in southeast Richfield, including a requirement for the development of a master plan. Missing middle homes are small-scale, compact units designed for affordability.
SITLA’s Aaron Langston addressed the council via Zoom. Langston has been involved in real estate development for the trust for the last two decades. The goal is to build something on the parcel that is beneficial for Richfield. He said at some point he would like to go over what they have done in other places. They want to provide homes that local people can afford. They are not looking to go dense and throw up apartments all over. They can select partners that put a cap on their projects’ profitability. This could prevent the City from making concessions and then having the developer do the project and then selling it at the maximum market value. SITLA wants to provide something that truly is affordable, and there have been some very good success stories throughout the state.
Councilmember Hansen asked for examples of this overlay zone being used and to what effect.
Langston said this specific model hasn’t been used, but there are SITLA developments that are similar, such as one in Washington City in Washington County. They reduced the setbacks, and increased the density for single family housing. They gave some concessions, and the developer was required to sell the homes at 105 percent of the cost. SITLA gets a percentage of the gross selling price of the home. In Washington SITLA has reduced its share and capped the developer’s share in what has been a successful project. It’s Coral Canyon.
Councilmember Chappell asked about the size of the overlay zone, and why it extended beyond the boundaries of the SITLA held land.
Langston said SITLA has no ability to impose anything on privately held land, and that the proposed overlay was a concept accounting for what could be development in the future. He said SITLA would not oppose reducing the proposed overlay to just its holdings.
Alexa Wilson, representing SITLA, said it was also part of an effort to not look at that parcel in isolation. Much of the land in the proposal isn’t even in the City, it was meant as a conceptual idea for what future growth could be.
Councilmember Chappell said the holistic view should be limited to what SITLA has and what can be developed with that. If there is a way to build smaller, single-family homes for less money, that sounds great but making it conditional upon having apartments or commercial included it becomes an issue.
Langston said even if the City adopted the proposal, SITLA would still come back with a plan that would have to be approved. SITLA wants to work with the City and not be in a vacuum. The idea is to produce something that is good for the town as a whole. If this is a situation where the City wants to look at just what was done in Washington County and it’s just single family detached, SITLA is OK with that idea.
City Administrator Jolley said by way of clarification, what the council is voting on tonight is not necessarily denying the missing middle concept. There is a process that would include amending the general plan and the zoning code. Those amendments are what the council is considering tonight. It would be creating an overlay zone that is not currently in the ordinance.
Councilmember Hansen said Richfield would wind up being the test balloon for this type of zoning, which he doesn’t consider a zone at all. The City has put tremendous effort into it current general plan. The City has implemented multiple zoning approaches at varying densities, some of which were more successful than others. The process hasn’t been taken lightly. Hansen said he is not in favor of amending the general plan and zoning ordinance at this point.
Councilmember Chappell asked if the City doesn’t approve the overlay zone, what are the other options.
Administrator Jolley said there are a lot of different options. They could rezone it as R1-6, which is 6,000-square foot lots. The City is in the process of refining its RM-11 zone, which could allow 4,500-square foot single family lots. There are a lot of tools in the existing zoning that could be used. If you reduce the lot size and put a deed restriction saying it must be a single family, those types of tools can be implemented. Cottage homes, duplexes and other types of housing could still be built without the overlay. It would just take some creativity and not rezoning the entire piece as one type of zone.
Mayor Burrows said there are quite a few older people who would like to see something like what is being considered with smaller, single-level homes. It’s something that is better addressed on a case-by-case basis.
Councilmember Chappell asked SITLA what it’s next step would be.
Wilson said this was a good faith effort to help the City achieve its goals. If this doesn’t hit the mark, they will think about a different approach.
Councilmember Chappell said he favors the approach of using the available tools and seeing if there are some restrictions that could be loosened up to create more single-family homes sold below market value.
Tanner Thompson, resident, asked how SITLA can perform its function of maximizing property value if it sells homes at less than market value.
Langston said his mission is indeed to make as much money for the state as possible. Part of how that is done is a bid of magic in terms of how they look at finance. Looking at Richfield, the current absorption rates are about 1 percent per year due to the one percent growth per year. Roughly, look at how much property is held by SITLA, and consider if it is built out at the level the market has consistently seen, it’s going to take X number of years to develop that. Based on that, X number of dollars are put into the permanent fund. In Washington County they did a PCD [Planned Community Development], which would be a similar idea to what is proposed here. If SITLA built this, there would be a higher absorption rate because they would be beating the market. It may take 10 years to build out or five years to build out. That increases the net present value, which is how SITLA monetizes the land. Selecting the right development partner is critical. They need someone who is willing to invest for a five percent return. However, there are those willing to do it.
Motion: Deny the proposed proposal to move forward with the process to amend the General Plan and text amendments to Title 17 of the Zoning Code and to allow and adopt a missing middle overlay zone for R1-10 zoning for SITLA’s 20+ acres in southeast Richfield, including a requirement for the development of a master plan. Missing middle homes are small-scale, compact units designed for affordability. Action: Approve motion, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Brayden Gardner.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen.
e. Presentation of Mayor Burrows’ proposed budget for fiscal year 2026/2027. The budget has to be adopted typically by the 20th of June, which may require a special work meeting, Administrator Jolley said. If the City were to implement a property tax increase, new legislative requirements establish that the process of notification would have had to have started on May 1.
Mayor Burrows said this budget is a total of $9,489,280. At this point revenues are down but should come in close to where the City’s revenues have been. Revenue is anticipated to be flat this year. Expenses have come down a little as well in the proposed budget. There is a 3 percent cost of living increase and healthcare has increased 17 percent, and state retirement has increased from .81 to 1.30.
The pool project will be completed in 2026, and the payment for that to the Utah Permanent Community Impact Fund Board is included in this budget.
The 400 West project is also on schedule to start this year. The 100 East bridge is also in the process as well. The City is also looking at trying to put in a sewer line near the golf course. There is also the possibility of installing a booster pump on the north end of town. A new water tank on the north end is also something that is likely needed.
While sales tax has been down, costs have all gone up on the supplies and materials the City uses. The City is not keeping up, and a possible increase in property tax may have to be considered, but it is too late to start that process this year, Mayor Burrows said. However, the City is going to have to address water and sewer rates. The City is going into the hole in these funds. Fuel is also a driving factor, and if it does come down, it won’t be until October or November, which will affect the garbage pickup service. He encouraged the council to go through the budget.
Financial Director Jenson said both the City and White’s Sanitation have been trying to absorb fuel costs. That is an example of the types of costs the City has been trying to absorb in its enterprise funds, and now it’s to the point it is falling behind in them. There has been a water rate analysis, which includes where the City is at, where it is proposing to go to and where it should be. The sewer fund is in the same boat. The enterprise funds, water and sewer, are the one area in the budget where the City is allowed to carry a balance, and this year Jenson had to do some work in order to get them to just zero out. The City needs to be aware of where it is so that the funds can continue to function as intended.
Mayor Burrows said he has always advocated for the City to be very conservative when it comes to raising rates. However, it is time to start raising some rates as much as he doesn’t to. Everything it is getting more expensive, including just running the pumps.
Jenson said the prices just keep going up for everything.
Administrator Jolley pointed out the revenue streams the City has from various taxes, the only one it can affect or change is property tax. The only one it controls is that of property tax. Sales tax, transportation tax and even the Parks Arts and Recreation tax can’t be changed. The last time the City did an increase, it was a 35 percent increase that netted approximately $300,000 in revenue. It’s the only way to keep up with inflation. Some communities do truth and taxation every year to keep up with inflation. The department heads in the City have been very careful in their spending. They have tried to save money, which has been put into capital projects for equipment and improvements they need. One area that has been put on the back burner for several years is the golf course, so it’s time for it to receive some of the PAR tax and recreation tax. The City was awarded a grant at the golf course for some improvements and the match on that will have to be paid. The system out at the golf course is old and needs to be addressed.
Councilmember Gardner asked about property tax and what could be considered.
Mayor Burrows said he would like to see what the percentages would be to increase revenue by $300,000, $400,000 and $500,000. With property tax, cities figure an amount they would like to ask for and its figured out from there, instead of just saying it should be a certain percentage. When you ask for $300,000 and it turns out to be 30 percent, that illustrates how little the City is actually getting from the property tax. The full property tax amount is huge, but the City’s portion of that is quite small. He said perhaps a $400,000 increase would be about a $30 to $40 a year increase.
Councilmember Hansen asked when the last time the City entered truth in taxation prior to the increase three years ago. It had been over 20 years, Administrator Jolley said.
Councilmember Hansen said it almost needs to be a standard operating procedure, but he understands the instinct not to increase it.
Richfield City brings in just a little more than $1 million in property tax each year. Mayor Burrows said prior to that the City was bringing in between $700,000 and $800,000, which is not very much when considering a $10 million budget.
Councilmember Gardner asked about a transportation utility fee, which may be an alternative to a property tax increase.
Administrator Jolley said the state views those types of fees the same as taxes in most instances. The Legislature has been trying to eliminate many of those, but some communities have been successful in implementing those. It’s something to consider, however, it would be a restricted fund that could only be used on roads. It requires a lot of analysis prior to implementation. The first step would be to find out how much the analysis would cost.
Councilmember Thomas asked if the funds from a transportation utility fee would be restricted to certain uses. Yes, it would be restricted.
Financial Director Jenson the Legislative session seemed focused on making the taxation process as transparent as possible. Some may feel that the state is pushing to make communities use fees for everything instead of property tax, but at the end of the day it is still basically a tax under a different name. Impact fees are an example of how funds collected are restricted, and the City has to account for how they are spent. Any change requires a new analysis of each impact fee. The Utah League of Cities and Towns have some great resources to help brush up on the fundamentals of truth in taxation in the state.
Carson DeMille, Jones & DeMille Engineering suggested that since Richfield is a smaller municipality, it would wait until it does a major project before heading into the analysis of impact fees. That way it would have something to gage it against.
The analysis of each impact fee can be done separately, Administrator Jolley said.
Councilmember Hansen said they don’t all have to be raised at the same time.
In the case of police and fire, you can only use the impact fee within the square footage of the building in which they are located.
Mayor Burrows said when the City set its current impact fees, it was common to purchase an acre foot of water for $8,000, while now it’s $15,000 or $16,000. The value has gone up, but the City isn’t allowed to increase its fees without analysis.
Administrator Jolley asked if the council would like to have a work session at 6 p.m. to work through the budget prior to its next regular meeting. The next meeting will require that the tentative budget is adopted, so a work meeting would be beneficial. Following that, a public hearing for the budget will have to be hosted in June.
- OTHER BUSINESS – Councilmember Hansen asked for an update on the pool construction. Administrator Jolley said it is on schedule and, tentatively, the hope is to have it open at the end of August. The actual pool will be poured starting next Monday.
Financial Director Jenson said any council member can coordinate a tour of the construction with Brady Edwards.
Councilmember Thomas said the first phase of the footings for the construction of the metal “R” located on the west hills have been completed. - ADJOURNMENT Motion: Adjourn the meeting Action: Approve, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Brayden Gardner.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5).
Yes: Andrew Chappell, Brayden Gardner, Kendrick Thomas, Kevin Arrington, Kip Hansen.