Utah city spending, salaries, and council meetings — searchable.

By the numbers

What’s indexed so far

Cities tracked
62
Utah cities with live transparency dashboards
Spending indexed
$63.4B
Total expenditures indexed · FY2014–2025 (complete years) · all 62 cities
Council meetings
4,259
Indexed across 62 cities
Source documents
10,508
Packets & agenda docs across 62 cities
Recent reports

Fresh from the data desk

All reports →
St. George City Council recap — July 2, 2026Source: St. George, UT
Date: 2026-07-02

Recap of the St. George City Council meeting on July 2, 2026: 23 agenda items as published, each linked to the source.

View full report
Woods Cross by the numbers: $219.8M in city spending, 2014–2026Source: Woods Cross City, UT
Date: 2026-07-01

A data-driven look at Woods Cross City's largest vendors and where $219.8M of indexed spending actually went.

View full report
West Point by the numbers: $152.6M in city spending, 2014–2026Source: West Point City, UT
Date: 2026-07-01

A data-driven look at West Point City's largest vendors and where $152.6M of indexed spending actually went.

View full report
Syracuse by the numbers: $489.0M in city spending, 2014–2026Source: Syracuse City, UT
Date: 2026-07-01

A data-driven look at Syracuse City's largest vendors and where $489.0M of indexed spending actually went.

View full report
Compare all cities

Every city, side by side

One row per city, color-graded so the outliers jump out. Click any column to re-rank — sort by money, by how many meetings we’ve indexed, or by the council transparency score. Each city links to its full portal.

City Spending Meetings Scored Avg score Vendors
Spending = total expenditures FY2014–2026 reported to Transparent Utah (transparent.utah.gov), except Santaquin, which uses council-approved check-register actuals. Vineyard’s figure reflects what the city reported to the state, which the 2025 State Auditor found incomplete for some years. Avg score is the mean 1–10 procedural-transparency score across that city’s scored meetings; † marks small samples (<10 scored). Vendor counts are per-vendor annual records from Transparent Utah (Santaquin tracks individual payments instead).
On every dashboard

What’s on each city’s dashboard

Every dataset is extracted from public documents and links straight back to the source PDF.

Council-Approved Payments

Searchable by vendor, fund, department, or date — each row linked to the exact packet PDF that approved it.

Employee Compensation

Back to FY2016, with per-employee year-over-year change and inflation-adjusted comparisons against the BLS CPI.

Grant Activity

Federal, state, and county grants the council has discussed or accepted, with source citations on every line.

Meeting Scorecard

Was the agenda focused, were major items given separate scrutiny, or was the night a kitchen-sink of stacked decisions? Tracked over time.

GRAMA Request Library

Pre-drafted public-records requests residents can copy and file — each tied to a specific gap in what’s currently public.

Why trust it

Built to be checked, not taken on faith

Source PDF on every row Resident-built & independent A dataset, not an investigation Not affiliated with any city
Why it exists

The watchdog gap is local.

Local government affects your daily life more directly than state or federal — your water rates, your road work, your fire department, your library — but it’s also the layer with the least independent scrutiny.

Big-dollar decisions routinely get bundled into “consent agenda” items and approved without discussion. The local newspaper that used to send a reporter to every meeting either downsized or vanished a decade ago. The void left behind is what this project fills.

  • Make local spending genuinely auditable by any resident with a browser.
  • Surface vendor concentrations and sole-source patterns while they’re still small.
  • Catch procedural drift when councils start bundling more decisions.
  • Hand residents specific, well-formed records requests instead of vague concerns.
What this is not

A dataset, not an investigation.

Numbers here are extracted from public documents and should be verified against the source packet before you cite them in a meeting, an article, or a complaint. Every meeting page links directly to the city’s official PDF — use that as the citation, not this site.

More: how the data is built · who runs this · terms

Contributor spotlight

The pattern is repeatable.

Pull every council packet, extract the check register, layer on the state’s salary data, score the meetings, draft the records requests. The work scales to any Utah city — new cities are added as time allows.

Your city?Requested
Browse all cities
62 / 248Utah cities tracked