Finance committee seeks full analysis of city fees and utility rates, including sewer and solid-waste projections

5505328 · July 29, 2025
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

Council members asked the administration for a consolidated list and forward-looking plan for all municipal fees and utility rates — including Buffalo Sewer Authority and solid-waste user fees — to avoid infrequent, large increases and to provide residents with predictable schedules.

The City of Buffalo Committee on Finance on July 29 requested a full-scale analysis of city fees and utility rates that would include schedules, recent histories and projections for future increases, citing concerns about multi‑decade gaps between rate adjustments for some services.

Council members said residents and businesses need advance notice and a predictable plan for fee changes. One councilmember told the committee that the Buffalo Sewer Authority has not raised rates in roughly 18 years and that waiting decades between increases leaves the city to make large, sudden adjustments that are difficult for household budgets to absorb.

Commissioner of Administration and Finance Nosworthy said Chapter 175 of the City Charter lists most city fees and that the administration can provide the requested list; he noted the sewer authority and other authorities have separate governance. Nosworthy said the solid‑waste user fee is ‘‘as close as it’s been in years’’ to being self‑sustaining after incremental increases but warned that a new transfer‑station contract will likely require higher rates.

Why it matters: Utilities and user fees fund ongoing operations and capital maintenance. Council members described deferred maintenance in sewer infrastructure and said incremental, planned increases would reduce the fiscal shock to residents compared with long gaps followed by sharp increases.

Council members asked for a comparative assessment with peer cities and a timeline for when fees would likely be adjusted. The committee sought a snapshot to inform budget deliberations after recess and asked the administration to provide the consolidated list and an analysis by the committee’s return in September.

Ending: Committee members tabled the item and requested the administration prepare the fee list, projections and suggested cadence for small, regular adjustments to avoid large one‑time hikes.