Utah County Commission Adopts Equipment Replacement Program | News, Sports, Jobs

Kelcie Hartley, Daily Herald

Utah County Commissioners, from left, Bill Lee, Tom Sakievich and Amelia Powers Gardner participate in a Utah County Commission meeting Wednesday, June 29, 2022.

Utah County commissioners approved a resolution to adopt an equipment replacement program for the county at Wednesday’s regular meeting.

County Budget Director Rudy Livingston created the replacement plan. It covers the replacement of county equipment with an estimated replacement cost of $5,000 or more, useful life greater than four years, and equipment that was not purchased from another fund. of internal service.

According to the plan document, it will be maintained by Livingston, who will create the equipment list, including information about the department that purchased the equipment, an inventory tag, equipment description, cost of original purchase date, estimated life, annual recapitalization amount, cumulative recapitalization, and estimated replacement date and cost.

Each department whose equipment is listed in the plan will be charged an annual recapitalization amount equal to the annual depreciation and inflation costs of the item until the cost of the item has been accrued.

“When we put these in place, the intent is to charge departments an annual amount based on the life of the equipment, so we recover the cost plus an inflation factor,” Livingston said. “Once we get to that, let’s say it’s a five-year-old asset, we don’t continue to charge them for it because we’ve already charged it.

“Now where we run into problems is when we have things that are estimated at five years for depreciation purposes, but in reality they last around 10 years. If we end up in a situation like this there we would be doing them a disservice by not charging an additional fee because five years after that end date it could cost more. That money would be in a fund. We are happy not to replace an item after five years, for example, if it doesn’t need to be replaced immediately. Why would we? That money will stay there for them.

Commissioner Bill Lee asked Livingston what would happen if a department created a replacement fund and ended up not using it.

“How do they know how much money is in there, and can they use it for something else or something new?” Lee asked.

Livingston said the money could be withdrawn or allocated elsewhere, but the purpose of this fund is not to do so, explaining that it is meant to remain in the fund for future uses toward departmental equipment.

“We have a list of every asset that will be contained here,” he said. “We intend to keep the list in our fix asset system. We don’t want to hide anything. We want to help departments and make it easier for them. That’s why we started this process to start with.

Lee asked if a clause could be added to the document stating that department heads would receive an annual report showing the amount of their department’s fund and the number of items listed. Livingston said there was already language in the program document for this.

In other cases, commissioners had to consider and approve the appointment of two people to the Utah County Housing Authority and one to the Utah Lake Authority.

Before talking to each other, the commissioners were approached by Conserve Utah Valley member Carol-Lyn Jardine.

“One of the things that concerns us as residents of Provo, Orem and other towns in Utah County and as people who are particularly concerned about the environment and our natural resources, is how the Utah Lake Authority is shaped to manage the lake,” Jardine said. “One of the main problems facing authorities is the ethical management of what they are responsible for looking after and maintaining public trust. We strongly encourage you, as a committee, seeking to nominate one of yourselves to serve on this council, to consider the ethics involved in assisting with authority management.

“Our second issue is to make sure that we seek to manage the lake from a balanced point of view. There has to be a balance between economic interest and science and understanding what is best for the lake. The third is to ensure that we collaborate with public authorities, private entities and the scientific community to ensure that decisions are open and transparent.

Lee currently sits on both councils and felt one of the other two commissioners should fill his seat to avoid having to repeat the process when Brandon Gordon, who won the primary election against Lee, joins the commission in January.

Lee recommended Commissioner Amelia Powers Gardner take her Housing Authority seat immediately with April Smith, who was recommended by the Housing Authority. Powers Gardner suggested Lee stay at the Lake Authority because he is an asset to the board, she said. The commissioners reached an agreement that Lee would remain on the board until December 1, when commissioner Tom Sakeivich would take his place.


Join thousands of people who already receive our daily newsletter.

Previous Florida's 'insurer of last resort' takes questionable step
Next UNK’s Vail recognized by Agricultural History Society | Local News