San Diego City Council Meeting: Solid Waste Fee & Tenant Utility Charges - June 9, 2025

The City Council convened on June 9, 2025, to consider two major items: adoption of a new solid waste management fee schedule (Item 201) and an ordinance on residential tenant utility charges (Item 200). The meeting included public testimony, staff presentations, council debate, and votes. The trash fee passed 6-3, while the tenant utility ordinance passed unanimously 8-0. Councilmember Campbell attended remotely due to a physical disability.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Item 201 (Trash Fee): Over 100 in-person speakers and 12 virtual speakers addressed the council, with the vast majority opposing the proposed fee schedule. Common concerns included: the fee being higher than the $23–$29 range promised in Measure B (2022 bait-and-switch), the financial burden on seniors and fixed-income households, the inclusion of costly enhancements (new containers, weekly recycling, bulky item pickup) that many did not want, the use of property tax billing (Proposition 218 violation concerns), and the opaque protest process. Some speakers supported the fee, citing equity for multifamily residents who already pay for private trash service, and the need to avoid deep budget cuts to parks, libraries, and public safety. A representative from IBEW 569 and the San Diego Police Officers Association spoke in favor, while the San Diego Building and Construction Trades Council also supported. Several speakers expressed distrust in city leadership and threatened lawsuits.
• Item 200 (Tenant Utility Charges): Public comment was largely supportive, with tenant advocates, Legal Aid, and community organizations urging passage. Speakers highlighted instances of landlords overcharging for utilities and the need for transparency. A few landlord representatives requested exemptions for small properties and clarification on notice requirements.

Discussion Items

• Item 201: Adoption of Solid Waste Management Fee Schedule (FY2026–2029)
  • Staff (Kirby Brady, Jeremy Bauer, Ally Accori) presented a detailed 45-minute overview, explaining that Measure B (2022) required the city to charge a fee to replace the historically underfunded general fund service. They noted the city currently serves ~226,500 eligible customers, with 1.4 million containers, many over 20 years old. The proposed fee ranges from $31.98/month (35-gallon) to $42.76/month (95-gallon) for the base service in Year 1, lower than the April proposal after incorporating IBA recommendations (reducing reserve target, delaying enhancements, etc.). The four-year rate schedule includes annual increases, with weekly recycling starting in Year 3. The fee will be collected via property tax bills starting July 2025. A $3 million financial assistance program (up to $2 million in direct aid) was outlined, though criteria are to be developed later.
  • IBA Charles Monica confirmed that the proposed options are viable and that lower fees would require service cuts or general fund subsidies.
  • Council debate: Councilmember Ilo Rivera (motion) and Council President Lacava (second) supported the fee as equitable and fiscally necessary to avoid $80–$100 million in additional budget cuts. Councilmembers Campillo, Von Wilpert, and Foster voted no, citing the discrepancy from the ballot estimate, the burden on homeowners, and process concerns (consultant costs, flawed outreach). Councilmember Whitburn and Campbell voted yes, emphasizing the need to fund essential services and the availability of subsidies.
  • Protest tabulation: The city clerk reported that 49,632 written protests were received, falling short of the 113,249 (50%+1) needed to block the fee. Thus, the fee was adopted.
• Item 200: Ordinance on Residential Tenant Utility Charges
  • Staff (Jeffrey Noen) proposed an ordinance requiring landlords to provide tenants with written notice before passing through city utility costs (water, sewer, stormwater, trash) and to supply documentation upon request. The ordinance also limits pass-through charges to no more than the landlord’s actual cost and requires separate identification of third-party billing fees.
  • Council unanimously approved the ordinance, with Councilmember Ilo Rivera highlighting protections for renters against exploitation amid rising costs. Several speakers requested strengthening amendments (automatic bill provision, cap on third-party fees), but those were not adopted at this meeting.

Key Outcomes

• Item 201 (Solid Waste Fee): Adopted 6–3 (Campbell, Whitburn, Lee, Campillo? Wait: final vote was 6-3. Let's check transcript: Councilmember Campbell voted yes, Whitburn yes, Foster no, Von Wilpert no, Lee yes, Campillo no, Moreno yes? Actually transcript says: Campbell yes, Whitburn yes, Foster no, Von Wilpert no, Lee yes, Campillo no, Moreno present? Let's re-read: "Councilmember Foster, Councilmember Von Wilbert, and Councilmember Campio voting no." That's three no's. The motion passed 6-3. Yes votes: Campbell, Whitburn, Lee, Ilo Rivera, Lacava? And Moreno? The roll call: Campbell yes, Whitburn yes, Foster no, Von Wilpert no, Lee yes, Campillo no, Moreno present? The transcript says "Councilmember Moreno. Present." but then later says "Councilmember Moreno. Present." Possibly she voted yes? She seconded the motion? Actually for Item 200 she seconded, but for Item 201 the second was Lacava. Need to check early vote: "Councilmember Campbell vote yes, Councilmember Whitburn vote yes, Councilmember Foster no, Councilmember Von Wilbert no, Council President Pro Tem Lee yes, Councilmember Campillo no, Councilmember Moreno present?" The transcript says "Councilmember Moreno. Present." but not explicitly yes/no. However, the final tally is 6-3. So I'll assume Moreno voted yes. Also Council President Lacava voted yes. So yes: Campbell, Whitburn, Lee, Ilo Rivera, Moreno, Lacava. No: Foster, Von Wilpert, Campillo.) The vote approved Option 1 (base service with weekly recycling in year 3) with the fee schedule as presented in Exhibit B1. The resolution declaring CEQA exemption was also adopted.
• Item 200 (Tenant Utility Charges): Unanimously passed 8–0 (Councilmember Campbell absent). The ordinance adds Chapter 9, Article A, Division 12 to the Municipal Code, effective 30 days after adoption.
• Next Steps: For trash fee, staff will return on June 24 to authorize tax roll billing and remove existing container fees. The customer portal will launch July 15, container delivery begins October 2025, and the first property tax bills with the fee will go out later in 2025.