Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee forwards 2026 solid waste levy; councilors ask about $32 collection fee and recent fiscal
Summary
The Public Works Committee recommended the special service district budget for solid waste to the full council, approving the 2026 tax rate and levy while members pressed staff about a recent $1 million fiscal action and whether the $32-per-unit collection fee will change.
The Public Works Committee voted to recommend the special service district budget for solid waste to the full City-County Council, adopting the 2026 tax rate and tax levy for the solid waste collection special service district.
The measure, presented as an administrative action by Jenny Carter, budget manager with the Office of Finance and Management, mirrors language in section 3.01(e) of the 2026 introduced budget ordinance. The committee moved and seconded a “do pass” recommendation and approved the measure by voice vote.
The proposal reflects the department's revenue assumptions for the solid waste fund, including a continuing $32-per-unit solid waste user fee and a property tax levy that, according to the department's finance staff, generates about 4.5 times as much revenue as the user fee. Sam Barrows, Chief Financial Officer for the department, said there was a fiscal action this year tied to supplemental funding for the solid waste garage and vendor contracts; that fiscal totaled approximately $1 million and was intended to finish construction by year-end.
Councilors asked whether the longstanding $32 user fee — unchanged for nearly 35 years, by one councilor's account — will increase. Barrows said the 2026 budget was built assuming the $32 fee and that contract savings and new contracts starting in 2026 reduced the need for more district revenue. He added the department has no plan to propose a fee increase at this time, and that the fee is not fixed by the vendor contracts: the contracts govern services and what the city pays vendors, not the citizen user fee.
Councilor Gates moved the recommendation to the full council, and the committee approved the motion by voice vote. The committee did not record a roll-call tally in the transcript excerpt; the chair announced, “The ayes have it.”
The committee discussion distinguished between one-time fiscal actions (the supplemental fund for the solid waste garage) and the ongoing revenue structure for the district (user fee plus property tax levy). Staff emphasized that future fiscals are possible if unexpected events occur but that current budget projections assume the levy and the unchanged user fee will cover 2026 operations.
No public speakers addressed Proposal 258 at the committee meeting.
The proposal will be considered by the full City-County Council on the schedule for the 2026 budget process.
