Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Fee topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident tells Chesterfield County the solid-waste fee is unlawful; council hears request for review

Chesterfield County Council · January 6, 2026
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

A rural resident told council the county's mandatory solid-waste fee functions as an unlawful tax for residents who do not use or cannot access county trash services and urged suspension and legal review; council acknowledged the concern and the request for an attorney-general opinion.

A Chesterfield County resident told council the county's mandatory solid-waste fee is an unlawful tax and asked officials to suspend the charge and conduct a legal review.

Kirby Hughes, who identified himself as a resident living outside municipal limits, told the council the fee charges rural residents who do not access county trash services or who already pay private trash providers. "A fee must provide a direct benefit to the person paying it," Hughes said, citing Burns v. Greenville County Council and South Carolina statutory tests for user fees. He asked council to suspend the fee, conduct a legal review, and provide exemptions for those who do not use or cannot access the service.

Council members acknowledged the presentation and indicated the matter would be reviewed. Madam Chair thanked Hughes for raising the issue. Several council members later discussed convenience-center usage, tonnage increases and the county's prior reliance on center-collected fees, and finance committee members asked for legal and operational follow-up as part of broader trash-management review.

The transcript records public request for formal review but does not include an immediate vote to suspend the fee; Mr. Hughes said he had contacted the South Carolina attorney general and expected the county to assess whether the fee meets statutory definitions of a user fee.