Council delays Transportation Utility Fee after resort and resident concerns

The Brian Head Town Council on May 12 reached consensus to remove a proposed Transportation Utility Fee (TUF) from the FY2027 budget and to continue work on a revised structure, potentially via a mid-year amendment if an acceptable framework is developed.

Marcus Keller of Cruze and Associates presented the TUF study, explaining that the fee uses the ITE Trip Generation Manual to convert land-use trip rates into Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs). Keller said the study identified a legal maximum of roughly $684,000 per year — about $30 per month per ERU — while staff and consultants recommended a $12-per-month per-ERU fee that would generate roughly $270,553 annually.

Town Manager Bret Howser told the council the $270,000 target reflected a $160,000 pavement-management funding gap and an $86,000 gravel-road maintenance gap. He said staff had prepared a scenario incorporating a 75% commercial discount and using the TUF to target $100,000 from fees; under that scenario the per-ERU cost would be about $6.50 per month.

Public comment included support from cabin owner Jim Vincent and a detailed statement from Tom Pettigrew, General Manager of Brian Head Resort. Pettigrew said the resort was "not opposed to the TUF" but listed three concerns: (1) the resort already contributes substantially through an enhanced service business license (which now generates nearly $700,000 annually for shuttle service and commercial snow removal) and that any ERU calculation should account for existing contributions; (2) the resort's primary access is State Route 143, a UDOT highway, and ERU-based calculations may not distinguish state-highway traffic from town-road trips, potentially exposing an ordinance to legal challenge; and (3) he requested a brief staff meeting before the June 9 meeting to ensure the fee structure accurately reflects town-road impact and is legally durable.

Council members agreed Brian Head's access pattern and the resort's existing contributions complicate a straightforward TUF. Members suggested direct collaboration with the resort and a small working group to refine the proposal; the council directed staff to remove the TUF from the FY2027 budget as adopted and return with a revised option that could be implemented mid-year if appropriate.