Thrive
City council hopes to minimize stormwater rate increase
Public Works Administrator Claude Tankersley said officials now expect to receive disaster recovery funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) “sooner than we had anticipated.”
St. Petersburg’s leadership continues searching for ways to fund much-needed stormwater projects without overburdening residents who already struggle to keep pace with soaring living costs.
Administrators presented the latest utility rate scenarios to city council members at their Aug. 7 meeting. They will hold a public hearing on the proposed changes, which include increasing stormwater rates by 17.5%, Thursday afternoon.
However, a new proposal would increase stormwater rates by 22.6% in fiscal year 2026. The additional revenue, and $32 million in utility bonds, would provide the city with $64 million to complete capital improvement and St. Pete Agile Resiliency (SPAR) projects.
“Nobody likes having this conversation about rates and where they need to go,” said Council Chair Copley Gerdes. “I’m really struggling to go from a 17.5% to a 22.6% increase. That’s where my big struggle is on this.”
The average customer would see their monthly municipal utility bill increase by 8% to 10% under the administration’s recommended rate schedule. Officials would allocate $10 million to SPAR “pre-planning work” in the upcoming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.
Many city council members would like to accelerate those projects due to increasing environmental threats. Mayor Ken Welch announced SPAR and its $614 million in stormwater initiatives in the aftermath of an unprecedented hurricane season.
Program funding remains elusive. In July, officials discussed letting voters decide whether officials will issue general obligation bonds to help pay for the projects.
A new property tax would finance the debt issuance if approved through a referendum in November 2026. “It’s going to be a hard pill to swallow,” said Councilmember Lisset Hanewicz.
“There’s only so much capacity for the rate payers.”
Hanewicz, like Gerdes and others, preferred capping the stormwater rate increase at 17.5%. Those revenues, combined with $25 million in grant funding, would provide $57 million for capital improvement and SPAR projects in FY26.
Public Works Administrator Claude Tankersley said officials now expect to receive disaster recovery funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) “sooner than we had anticipated.” Councilmember Brandi Gabbard questioned if the city has the “bandwidth” to utilize that money “tomorrow versus over six years.”
Capital Improvements Director Brejesh Prayman noted that the council recently approved hiring outside firms to assist with the planning and permitting process for stormwater projects.
Prayman explained that stormwater projects typically require additional regulatory approval from state and federal agencies. “We will continue to push as hard as we can to start these projects early,” he said.
Gabbard said the city could combine the $25 million from HUD with the scenario that includes $32 million in utility bonds and a 22.6% stormwater rate hike. “I’m just feeling like we’re at a place where we just have to make what I think is a relatively low investment over time for a better return on that investment.”
Gabbard believes vulnerable residents would prefer to pay an additional $1.16 on their monthly bill to help fund projects that could potentially keep their homes from flooding. She is not “ready to give up on us moving something forward more aggressively today, with the actual utility rates.”
Councilmember Gina Driscoll, like most of her colleagues, preferred the 17.5% increase with the $25 million in grant funding going to the most “shovel-ready” projects. She believes residents will not consider a debt issuance if “they aren’t seeing enough going on now.”
Councilmember Corey Givens Jr. said developers should shoulder more of the burden. Administrators plan to increase sewer capacity fees from $600 to $1,000 per restroom.
However, those revenues can only support sewer projects. Tankersley declined to opine on any other potential impact fees the city could impose on developers during the utility rate discussion.
Givens said administrators should consider selling parcels within the Historic Gas Plant District to fund infrastructure improvements. “I would rather not burden taxpayers and burden those who have the money.”
City officials will hold a first reading of ordinances related to utility rate changes at 5 p.m. Thursday. The final public hearing is Sept. 4.
Layne Boleman
August 15, 2025at11:40 am
Our mayor is more concerned about shoveling money into free stadiums, pointless arts districts and crosswalk rainbows.
Much easier for him and the dolts within council to jack up taxes instead of cutting costs and prioritizing spending on serious pressing matters. It’s an absolute disgrace what kind of clowns are in charge and how they’re trashing the city and the people struggling to live here.
Beth David
August 14, 2025at7:57 am
Other Cities have signed 99 year leases with developers, including Hines in DC. . Selling the gas plant land is not advisable. It’s time for a citizen driven process to plan the gas plant and then bring in developers to follow the plan. Allowing developers to write the contracts means City taxpayers get a bad deal. See Rays contract as an example. Of a bad contract. “The land price was too low”, according to our Mayor. .
Will Michaels
August 13, 2025at10:31 am
Last year our city was impacted by three major hurricanes, Debbie, Helene and Milton. Over 15,000 homes were flooded. Property damage in Pinellas exceeded $2.4 Billion. Recent history of record-breaking temperatures and hot Gulf water is not going away. Hopefully we will dodge the bullet this season but we must give high priority to plan and fund to keep our city safe as pollution warming and increasingly threatening weather events continue into the future. There is the potential to do more flood mitigation in 2026 if funds are made available rather than wait for uncertain bond funding in later years. It is good to see the mayor and council are trying to make this happen in a way that is as fiscally fair to residents as possible. It would be helpful to the public if a listing of SPAR projects, both those already accomplished and those proposed over the next 5 years were prominently posted on the city website. That information is presently there but not in one place and hard to find. (Also, my understanding of the draft budget is that it includes $16.4M for SPAR out of $271M needed for stormwater-related infrastructure over the next 5 years. Assuming the city receives the $25M in HUD funds early enough in 2026 to be used in 2026 that would total 41.4M.)
Ryan Todd
August 12, 2025at10:05 pm
Adopt a form-based code, sell the 86-acres, and use the revenue to fund infrastructure improvements. What happened to impact development fees? Raise them to account for the actual impact of new development.
Thank you, Corey Givens. The single rational councilman.
JAMES GILLESPIE
August 12, 2025at4:15 pm
how to create stress and strain for taxpayers. former administrations of the city should have done better planning to spread the costs. on the other hand who wants to walk in or on water?
Lucas Stone
August 12, 2025at3:09 pm
Before you raise rates by double digits, show us first where all the previous stormwater money went. Feels like they’re draining our wallets faster than they’re draining the streets.