The community's frosty reception will cause Auburn to drop a proposed tax levy decrease and flat rate for trash disposal.

City Manager Mark Palesh made his decision to drop the budget's plan to reduce property taxes by 11 percent and impose a $108 annual fee for garbage collection after, to his surprise, Auburn city councilors told him they wouldn't support it.

“I think it's wrong to punish the poor block with the $50,000 houses and the lower incomes or the lower assessed value,” Councilor Matt Smith said.

The break even point is about $70,000 assessed value. Property owners over that limit would save more money on the tax cut than the $108 trash fee.

Homeowners with lower assessed value would not.

The city boasts 3,150 single family homes assessed for $70,000 or more, City Assessor Sue Chandler said.

This leaves 2,486 single family homes assessed for less than that key amount.

Rick Colavito, chairman of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee which came up with the plan, said a flat fee would prove more fair to residents than forcing a floating rate that would allow some residents to pay $70 while others paid $200 for the same service.

“Well, the alternative isn't fair,” Smith responded to that concept. “It's not fair to have the lower income people to take up the burden. It should be the high income residents.”

Currently, residents pay $1.43 per $1,000 of their properties' assessed values. Under the plan, city officials would have removed that figure from the taxes and instead would have funded trash collection with the flat rate of $9 per month for each home, apartment unit and business.

However, most officials agree the city should continue to explore getting the tax-exempt properties to contribute to the garbage disposal fund, even though the garbage fee plan is removed from the budget proposal.

Councilor David Dempsey said he wouldn't back a plan that didn't decrease everyone's expense.

“I'm flabbergasted. This is the first time (in my experience) people have turned down a tax decrease,” Palesh said.

Colavito too was taken back by the opposition the proposal received. People have misconceptions that residents had to pay twice, or that this was a cash cow for the city, he said. The fund would have been self-sustaining, only increasing when the cost of disposal rose.

However, Smith pointed to the fact that some businesses would have paid twice if they contracted for trash services. Colavito suggested the money saved by the tax decrease would have made up for the extra $108 annual cost.

Also, the larger corporations are subsidizing other people's trash service, and the plan was designed to have everyone to pay their share, Colavito said.

“I think the issue is that the plan originally suggested to decrease taxes but it didn't decrease (expenses) for people with assessments of $50,000 or lower,” Dempsey said. “It's not fair for lower income of the community.”

But Colavito says the council isn't being fair to other residents and businesses who overpay.

“I see both sides of the arguments but something has to be done,” Colavito said.

Staff writer Jessica Soule can be reached at 253-5311, ext 267 or jessica.soule@lee.net