Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Electric Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves four ordinances to implement recommended electric rate changes; no-change bill fails
Summary
After reviewing a utility rate study, the council rejected the no-change option (bill 3673) for lack of motion and approved ordinances 3674–3677 that add a monthly service-availability fee ($8 residential; $12 commercial/demand) and reduce kWh charges about 2% for certain classes.
The Salem City Council approved four ordinances on electric service rates after staff summarized a consultantrate study that recommended adding a monthly service-availability fee and shifting rate responsibility among customer classes. The council did not move on a no-change ordinance, which the mayor announced failed for lack of a motion.
City clerk Culler explained the council had two choices: retain current rates under bill 3673, or adopt the consultantrecommended package in bills 3674 through 3677. "They recommended the addition of a service availability fee of $8 for residential and $12 a month for both commercial and demand meters," Culler said, and she summarized the study's recommendation to reduce certain kilowatt-hour rates by roughly 2% and shift rates among customer classes because residential customers had been subsidized.
Alderman Whelan moved to approve bill 3674 and the motion carried; subsequent motions to approve bills 3675, 3676 and 3677 also carried on recorded voice votes. Council members on the dais voted in the affirmative during each roll call for the four ordinances.
The councildebate was brief and focused on whether to accept the consultantrecommendation; several members said they deferred to the study authors as the experts. No formal amendments to the ordinances were offered during the discussion.
With passage of the ordinances, the new structure establishes a fixed monthly service-availability charge (stated in the clerk's summary as $8 residential; $12 commercial/demand) and modest per-kWh adjustments intended to rebalance subsidies across customer classes. The mayor announced the outcome on each ordinance after the roll-call votes.
The council did not provide a detailed implementation timeline in the public remarks on the record; staff or utility department follow-up on effective dates, billing schedules and customer notices were not specified during the meeting.
