Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Amarillo council narrows solid-waste increase options, delays proposed mosquito-fee
Summary
Council reviewed solid-waste revenue scenarios to cover pay raises, a civilian pay study and a new demolition crew, asked staff to favor a commercial-heavy split and declined to adopt a 50¢ monthly vector-control charge now, directing more community outreach and a follow-up analysis.
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Amarillo’s City Council spent much of its Aug. 26 budget workshop weighing how to raise roughly $2.7–3.0 million to pay for police and fire raises, a civilian pay study and an in‑house dangerous‑structure removal team. Mayor (Speaker 1) and city staff laid out multiple solid‑waste fee scenarios and a separate 50¢ monthly vector‑control fee that would generate an estimated $312,000 for environmental health.
Finance staff presented a package that shifts a $130,000 demolition line into solid‑waste revenue, captures roughly $670,000 from solid‑waste fee increases to cover prior TMRS/COLA adjustments and proposes splitting any additional increases between residential and commercial customers in several ways. One scenario would raise residential customers about $2.54 per month; a heavily commercial‑weighted scenario would raise some commercial accounts as much as $28.91 per month.
Laura Storrs, who led the revenue review, said the recommended solid‑waste adjustments would help the city achieve council priorities while holding off on a street‑maintenance fee. Storrs told council the solid‑waste increases are intended to support new internal crews, recover operating costs and cover a portion of an IT and pay‑study contribution.
Council members questioned how the numbers fit into the cash‑flow sheet and how reliable various revenue sources were, including landfill usage and one‑time transfers. Several members urged caution about relying on nonrecurring transfers or optimistic trends. The council debated whether to add the separate 50¢ vector fee to utility bills to move environmental health toward full cost recovery or to fold the roughly $300,000 into the solid‑waste package.
After extended discussion, council signaled it preferred a distribution that would place the lion’s share of increases on commercial customers (a 25% residential / 75% commercial split was discussed) and voted to delay adding the new vector fee to water bills. Staff was asked to return with a refined solid‑waste allocation and additional analysis on cost recovery options across departments.
The workshop also directed staff to continue work on a targeted civilian pay study (the draft budget includes $600,000 toward a $2.2 million study) and to prioritize funding that would lift sworn police raises toward 4% and fire raises toward 3% if the revenue plan holds. Council emphasized preference for funding recurring pay increases from recurring revenue rather than one‑time transfers.
Council did not adopt any fee increases at the meeting; staff will bring more detailed scenarios and a solid‑waste split recommendation to a future session before public hearings and formal adoption.

