Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Columbia County hears proposed 2.2% transfer-station pass‑through; private haulers seek larger collection increases
Summary
Columbia County commissioners held a public hearing June 18 on proposed increases to transfer‑station and curbside collection rates in unincorporated areas of the county.
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Columbia County commissioners held a public hearing June 18 on proposed increases to transfer‑station and curbside collection rates in unincorporated areas of the county. Mike Russell, Public Works staff, said the county is proposing a 2.2% pass‑through increase to the transfer‑station tipping fee tied to the West Coast CPI and recommended by the Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC).
The recommendation follows the county’s rate review process and a Detailed Cost Review (DCR). ‘‘The overall impact is, the county will be increasing our transfer station tipping fee 2.2%, which is commensurate with the CPI West Coast as of March,’’ Mike Russell said. Jake (Solid Waste staff) told the board the DCR procedure uses an accepted operating ratio of 8%–14% and that the 2.2% figure is the CPI pass‑through calculated under that procedure.
If approved, the county’s commercial tipping fee would rise from $109.94 per ton to $112.36 per ton. Private haulers’ requests would produce larger changes for residential collection: Waste Management proposed a 5.9% increase (including the 2.2% CPI pass‑through) that would raise 35‑gallon weekly service in the Scappoose franchise area from $34.64 to $36.68. Waste Connections, doing business as Hudson, proposed a 3.5% increase (including the pass‑through) that would raise St. Helens service from $39.36 to $40.73, Clatskanie service from $42.51 to $43.99, and Rainier service from $39.81 to about $41.20.
Russell and SWAC members said the committee reviewed the companies’ cost reports at its May 8 meeting and found the requests reasonable. Company representatives and staff described the drivers behind the increases: truck depreciation, higher labor and fuel costs, fewer roll‑off loads and construction‑related C&D revenue, investments in new trucks, added administrative staffing and higher general‑and‑administrative costs, and tariff or tip‑fee changes at receiving facilities.
Khan Tomlinson, representing Waste Management, told the board the percentage requests are comparable to recent city increases. ‘‘This overall percentage‑wise is comparable to the city rates changes,’’ Tomlinson said, noting similar adjustments this year in nearby jurisdictions.
No members of the public provided testimony in opposition, support or neutral comment during the hearing; the board closed the testimony portion and moved to deliberation. Commissioner McGruder said the SWAC review and the comparability with nearby city rates supported approval, and commissioners thanked company representatives and staff for working through the process.
The board did not take a final vote on the rate adjustments at the hearing. Russell said staff has prepared a draft order that will be reviewed by the department and placed on the board’s consent agenda for formal approval at a future meeting. He told commissioners he would forward the draft order to them for comment before it appears on the consent calendar.
The Solid Waste Advisory Committee has one public‑member vacancy, and staff asked the board to advertise for an applicant from Clatskanie. People interested in the position were directed to the county website or to call 397‑4322 for application information.
Why this matters: county tipping fees and franchised collection rates affect hauler revenue and household bills across the unincorporated area. The pass‑through portion is tied to CPI under county procedure; additional company requests reflect operating costs and capital investments.
Votes at a glance from this meeting: the board later approved the consent agenda (see separate votes list in the meeting record) but did not adopt the rate changes at this hearing; staff will bring an order for the board’s formal action at a subsequent session.
Speakers quoted or cited above are listed in the article’s speaker list; direct quotes are attributed only to those speakers.
