Senate rejects bill to equalize municipal solid-waste fees after contested floor debate

Senator Bramble, sponsor of House Bill 246, presented legislation intended to equalize municipal solid-waste fees at the state level following a two‑year task force. The bill originally proposed higher per‑ton fees that were reduced in successive amendments; floor amendments and competing policy fixes dominated the debate.

Senator Bramble described the bill as a response to varying local fees and a step toward “equaliz[ing] the fees at the state level for all municipal solid waste.” On the floor he explained the amendment process that reduced proposed fees from 50¢ down to 19¢ per ton in the version before the Senate.

Senator Waddup (floor sponsor of Amendment 17) proposed a targeted offset so that operators who already pay regulatory fees to federal or tribal regulators — for example, a facility using Goshute reservation land that pays $1.75 per ton with 55¢ regulatory — would receive a credit and not be double‑charged. Waddup called that approach a fairness measure: it would not “add an additional fee on” facilities already paying regulatory oversight costs.

Opponents raised fiscal projections and equity concerns. Senators and municipal representatives warned the change could sharply increase costs for municipal landfills and local governments; the floor record includes referenced spreadsheets and examples (Trans Jordan projected +74%, Bountiful +127% in circulated materials). Senator Bramble and others countered that the bill's intent was to shift most of the burden to commercial/industrial users and that municipalities broadly supported a uniform fee in task‑force discussions.

Two amendment votes defined the bill's outcome. Amendment 16 (the sponsor’s fee adjustments resulting in a 19¢ rate) was accepted in an initial action. Amendment 17 (the proposed credit/offset for entities paying other regulatory fees) was debated at length and failed on a standing/roll count (14–12). After floor attempts to rescind and selectively adopt portions of Amendment 16 to make the 19¢ language consistent, the body took a final roll‑call vote on the bill. The Senate recorded 4 ayes and 23 nays; HB 246 failed on third consideration on the floor.

Floor proponents emphasized policy goals of fairness and uniform oversight; opponents emphasized municipal budget impacts and called the change a tax increase on local constituents. The bill’s failure leaves the status quo of local fee variation in place unless alternate legislation is pursued. Sponsors indicated they would bring additional fiscal detail and revisit aspects when reconciling House/Senate positions.