Kane County holds Fire SSD town hall; county treasurer offers projections on potential fees

On the evening of Tuesday, April 15, 2025, the Kane County Commission hosted a town hall in order to take feedback from the residents of the proposed Vermillion Cliffs Fire Protection Special Service District, as well as to present information composed by the County Treasurer and County Assessor; given the proposed Fire Protection Agreement from Kanab City, county officials calculated potential fees based on the city’s tax assessable value pricing model.

Per Commissioner Celeste Meyeres, who chaired the meeting, “We have proposed the district, the protest period for that district ends on April 28, and unless there are sufficient protests, the district could then be formed - to be clear, a structural fire response district east of Kanab, with the county commission serving as the board until fall of 2026 when an election could take place … The district will not be formed just when the protest ends, the commission will meet and finalize the propulsion of that creation, then we have 30 days to submit the paperwork to the lieutenant governor’s office.” Meyeres clarified that only once the district is formed would they have the authority to officially respond to Kanab City’s offer.

Meyeres also clarified that the City’s proposed contract was not the final draft of that potential contract, stating, “It’s like buying a house; there’s offers and counteroffers, we’ll still have some back and forth, we’re negotiating, it’s not a done deal.”

Commissioner Gwen Brown added in opening comments, “There’s this misconception that as soon as the district is formed, we’ll suddenly not do what the people say … we’re trying to do what’s best for everybody. Know that’s why we’re here, to listen. If enough people protest, it’ll stop, if it doesn’t, it’ll go forward.”

Commissioner Patty Kubeja commented, “What Kanab City’s contract gives us is the dollar amount and that’s what we haven’t had that up until now. That $300 from an older draft got stuck in peoples’ minds, and we could keep that, but we’re going to have a contract and we’re going to have to come up with that much money … that was a guesstimate. I’ve been in contact looking for grants and loans, it looks like we might have to move that train faster down the track, instead of thinking ‘not right now,’ we can get in a position where we don’t have to contract with someone else.”

At the commission’s request, County Treasurer Kieran Chatterley calculated the fees that would be levied based on the city’s proposed model, as well as some alternative fee models that could meet the city’s asking price. Stated Chatterley, “We’re trying to create a way to make this equitable for everybody. When I took Kanab City’s proposed fee - page seven in their contract - you can see based on the value what the proposed fee would be: $293.528 … in that range. You’re trying to build up your fund balance [to work toward establishing fire protection capacity within the SSD], we would set up a high-interest bearing account to have the funds disbursed to the board.”

Chatterley offered a few examples of the increase based on property value: “If your taxes last year without fire protection were $1,504, this year they would be $1,803.” With information provided by Kane County Assessor Ryan Maddux, Chatterley’s spreadsheet lists the parcels within the proposed district by tax assessable value; the sheet with exact information is available from the Treasurer’s Office in the County Courthouse at 76 North Main.

County Assessor Ryan Maddux then took the stand to present tax information pertinent to the SSD. Maddux specified how primary residences would be taxed less than secondary property like short-term rentals owing to Utah’s Primary Exemption Tax - if the collected funds are based on taxes and taxable value instead of a flat fee, stating, “With flat fees, assessed value doesn’t figure in … In Utah we reassess annually - a systematic review occurs every year, analyzing market values based on January 1 every year. Once every five years, we are required to do a detailed review where we need to physically go out and analyze the property itself. If you have any questions, I’m always available, feel free to call me or come in and visit.”

Following Maddux’s presentation, the meeting was opened to the general public for comments and feedback. The majority of individuals who stood were in favor of the tax assessable value model of fee collection, with some commenting on how a flat fee would inordinately punish property owners with collections of small, diverse lots such as some ranchers; those opposed to the assessed value model stated it would be unfair to those who had made greater investments in their property, with one stating “Democracy is just the tyranny of the many,” and “For the money this would cost me, I could install hoses and hydrants and do a better job than I would get from the fire department.”

At the close of the meeting, the Commission answered some of the direct questions presented over the course of the evening, specifying: that the fire protection district did not include the highway; there would be development fees for new properties being developed, but not for new structures being built in addition to already existing structures; and the total number of votes necessary to protest the SSD to cancellation was 138.

The commission invited further feedback and comments by email or phone, via commission@kane.utah.gov, and phone numbers for individual commissioners on the county website. The recording of the meeting, as well as the agenda, are available on the Utah Public Notice website.