Hyde Park's auditor reports General Fund reserves over the state limit for a second year

Hyde Park City's General Fund held more in unreserved reserves at June 30, 2025 than state rules allow, its auditor reported, the second year in a row the auditor made that finding. ^[2][3]

Richey, May & Co., LLP, of North Logan, gave a qualified opinion on the city's compliance with two state requirements, budgetary compliance and fund balance, in a report dated Oct. 24, 2025. It gave an unmodified opinion on the other areas it tested, including restricted taxes, the fraud risk assessment, governmental fees and Utah Retirement Systems. ^[1]

The fund balance finding

Finding 2025-01 says the General Fund unreserved fund balance "exceeded the State required threshold of 35% of general fund revenue." It gives the cause as General Fund revenues that "increased again during the year," and says that even with transfers to the capital projects fund, the balance "was still too high at year end." ^[2]

The auditor recommended that the city review the balance during the year and transfer money to its capital projects funds as needed to stay below 35%. ^[2]

The same finding was made for fiscal 2024 as 2024-01. In that year the city responded that it would review the balance and make transfers as needed. The fiscal 2025 status line says the city transferred money into both capital projects funds, "but the general unreserved fund balance was still in excess of 35% as of June 30, 2025." ^[3]

The figures

The General Fund's revenue was $6,353,968 in fiscal 2025, against a final budget of $5,943,000. Planning and zoning charges brought in $757,243, compared with $370,000 budgeted, and investment income was $368,950, compared with $200,000 budgeted. ^[5]

General Fund spending was $5,010,644, against a final budget of $5,593,000. The fund transferred $350,000 to the capital projects funds, and its balance rose by $993,324 to $5,826,583. ^[5]

Of that balance, $2,634,063 was unassigned, up from $2,331,528 a year earlier. The rest was restricted for roads, capital projects and impact fees. ^[4]

The wastewater budget finding

Finding 2025-02 says Wastewater Collection Fund expenditures exceeded the amounts appropriated in the final budget. It gives the cause as costs incurred toward the end of the year, after budget amendments had been made. ^[2]

The audit reports $1,295,561 in operating expenses for the fund in fiscal 2025, including $836,925 for services. It does not print the fund's final budget. ^[8][2]

The auditor recommended the city compare expenses with the approved budget in each fund, paying attention to costs incurred but not yet paid before year-end. ^[2]

Responses and the budget since

The "Views of Responsible Officials" lines under both fiscal 2025 findings are blank in the report filed with the State Auditor. ^[2]

The budget the city filed with the State Auditor, created Aug. 31, 2026, lists a $125,000 General Fund transfer to the parks capital projects fund in its "Budgeted 2027" column, compared with $400,000 budgeted and estimated for the prior year. It lists no amount for a transfer to the general capital projects fund. ^[6]