St. Helens council directs staff to prepare $35 municipal services fee to voters after budget briefing
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Faced with a projected general‑fund shortfall, councilors asked staff to prepare a municipal services fee (EDU‑based) option that would aim for a 20% reserve (roughly $35 per EDU/month) and to bring materials outlining what services would be preserved or cut if voters reject it.
Councilors and staff focused on the city’s projected general‑fund shortfall and two voter‑approved options to raise recurring revenue: a municipal services fee charged per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) and a temporary local option property tax levy.
Finance staff presented preliminary scenarios: a $24/EDU/month fee would generate roughly $1.76 million and produce a 10% reserve; a $35.30/EDU/month fee would generate about $2.59 million and meet a 20% reserve target staff recommended as the prudent minimum. A local option levy scenario priced at $1.49 per $1,000 assessed value could achieve a 10% reserve but would be subject to Measure 5/50 compression and yield a smaller net amount in some cases.
Council debate centered on which revenue tool to refer to voters and how ambitious the ask should be. Several councilors argued a 20% reserve is more responsible; one councilor said she would back a $35 fee with a 10‑year sunset and clear voter disclosure of services sustained. Others warned that voters dislike fees and taxes and were skeptical of passability, arguing staff should also present budgets showing service reductions should a measure fail.
City attorney and staff explained timeline constraints: a municipal services fee requires ordinance action and (if not unanimous for one‑reading adoption) two readings and specific notice timelines; a local option levy uses a resolution and county filing deadlines. Staff recommended the council pick one path so staff could prepare draft materials for the next regular meeting.
Council outcome and next steps: The council provided direction for staff to prepare a municipal services fee scenario aiming for the 20% reserve (about $35/EDU/month) and to bring a detailed ballot referral package and department impact statements to the next meeting. Because the council did not achieve unanimity for one‑reading adoption, staff said the fee would be prepared to go through the required two readings and public notice procedures if the council later votes to adopt and refer it.