Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears presentations on proposed stormwater, solid-waste and water/sewer rate increases effective Oct. 1, 2025
Summary
City staff presented ordinances that would raise monthly stormwater, solid-waste and water/sewer user fees effective Oct. 1, 2025; council discussion focused on rate impacts for households and small businesses and communications with constituents. Final votes are not recorded in the transcript.
The Tulsa City Council heard presentations and asked questions about three separate ordinance items proposing rate increases for stormwater service charges, residential solid-waste collection and water/sewer user fees, each slated in the backup for an operative date of Oct. 1, 2025.
Councilors and staff emphasized the cumulative effect of multiple utility increases on household budgets. One councilor asked staff to assemble a “holistic” view showing how increases across city utilities, electricity (PSO) and natural gas (ONG) would interact for an average household. Staff said they had sent some comparative data but that converting kilowatt-based PSO estimates into average monthly household impacts required additional work.
Key points from the discussion: - The proposed stormwater service charge increase would raise the monthly fee by 12%, from $12.22 to $13.69 (operative 10/01/2025), an increase of about $1.47 per month per account as presented in the packet. - The solid-waste ordinance would adjust monthly user fees for standard and premium residential collection services and amend charges for “physically limited services” (residents with medical certification to receive backyard pickup) with the same operative date. - The water and sewer ordinance covers multiple sections of Title 11C and proposes water and sewer rate adjustments effective Oct. 1, 2025; packet material includes multi-year averages and capital cost drivers.
Councilors discussed the policy principle that utility fees are intended to be cost-recovery (not a general revenue source), the need to reduce long-term subsidy, and the political and practical difficulty of raising fees after a decade of little or no change. One councilor noted stormwater fees cannot be avoided by households in the same way residents can change water use.
No final recorded vote on these ordinances appears in the transcript; councilors requested better public-facing explanations of average household impacts and more detail on how the city derived averages and capital-cost assumptions.
