Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee backs 18% solid-waste fee rise; majority of increase funded by general fund subsidy

3790094 · June 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Salem City’s Committee of the Whole voted 5-0 to forward an 18% increase in solid‑waste fees for FY26 to the full City Council after staff said enterprise‑fund costs are rising by $765,055 and that most of the fund’s revenue is currently covered by a general‑fund subsidy.

Salem City’s Committee of the Whole voted unanimously to forward proposed solid‑waste fee increases for fiscal year 2026 to the full City Council after staff said the trash enterprise fund’s costs are rising by $765,055 and that the city intends to apply an 18% fee increase for FY26.

Staff member summarized the proposal as an 18% increase for FY26, larger than the prior annual increases (around 2.5%), and explained the city planned to maintain the existing proportional split between the general‑fund subsidy (77% of current revenue into the fund) and ratepayer payments (23%). Staff said that of the $765,055 total increase, $173,737 would be recovered from ratepayers and the rest via the subsidy. The specific fee changes presented were: owner‑occupied residential fee increasing from $21.86 to $25.79; non‑owner‑occupied (nonresidential) increasing from $1.3886 to $1.6385 (as read in the presentation); and commercial establishments increasing from $31.71 to $37.41.

Councilor Cohen moved to refer the solid‑waste fee changes to the full council with a positive recommendation; the motion carried on a 5-0 vote. Staff noted the subsidy portion (transfer from the general fund to the trash enterprise fund) is typically finalized when the tax rate is set in December, and the committee did not set that transfer at this meeting.

The committee’s action was a referral only; no final fee ordinance or tax-rate decision was adopted at the committee meeting. Staff offered to provide further budget detail if councilors had follow‑up questions before the item reaches the full council.