Thrive
St. Pete utility rates to increase amid infrastructure upgrades
St. Petersburg residents will likely see their municipal utility bills increase by 8-9% as administrators continue grappling with increased infrastructure costs exacerbated by an unprecedented hurricane season.
Developers could see their sewer capacity fees soar from $600 to $1,000, a 66.67% spike. The proposed stormwater rate for fiscal year 2026, which begins Oct. 1, will increase by an average of 17.5%.
Administrators presented the proposed utility rate program to city council members for the first time Thursday at a Budget, Finance and Taxation Committee meeting. The increases do not reflect funding for the highly-touted St. Pete Agile Resiliency Plan (SPAR), which would cause stormwater rates to increase between 20% and 75% in 2027 instead of the planned 15%.
“Let’s just call SPAR what it is – it is a buzzword for taking the $600 million that’s in the stormwater improvement plan and making it a reality,” said Councilmember Brandi Gabbard. “I want to get out of buzzwords and hoping and get to a place where we have a real conversation about what we are willing to really do now. Because we were willing to do it last year for one small area of our city.”
Gabbard was referring to the administration’s willingness to cover $130 million in infrastructure upgrades for a new Tampa Bay Rays stadium and the surrounding Historic Gas Plant District. Residents have questioned why officials could not do that for the rest of the city.
Public works administrator Claude Tankersley called SPAR aspirational. “We are trying to shoot for the stars to get this work done,” he said.
Gabbard said the “50-50 scenario” of equally funding SPAR through debt financing and utility fees is “not sustainable for people.” Stormwater rates would increase by 75% in 2027 before a more modest 7.5% in 2028.
Councilmember Lisset Hanewicz noted the committee had a similar conversation in 2024, before officials voted on the Gas Plant’s redevelopment, regarding how St. Petersburg would pay for $6.8 billion in capital improvement projects (CIP) – water resources and infrastructure improvements account for 73% – over the next 30 years. “The numbers were staggering,” she said.
“Yes, there are investments being made in our system, but not at the level we need and that the public would like to see,” Hanewicz added. “And frankly, sometimes it does take a hurricane for people to realize, OK, this needs to be done, and it needs to be done now.”
She believes residents are ready for officials to discuss issuing debt to finance long-overdue infrastructure upgrades. Hanewicz said the amount should exceed $130 million.
She also stressed the importance of clarifying what projects would receive funding. Hanewicz called that a “much bigger conversation” than what was presented at the meeting “because of what people experienced last year.”
Council Chair Copley Gerdes said the city would have used Intown Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) tax revenues to pay for the Gas Plant’s infrastructure. While he would consider using those resources for stormwater projects in corresponding districts, he opposed moving away from the recently implemented 50% financing and 50% rate revenue model and incurring additional debt.
“We went 20 years with no rate increases,” Gerdes continued. “We are, unfortunately, paying the piper for that. So, I’m struggling to get away from something we worked really hard to get to again. That doesn’t mean I’m absolutely against it; I’m just very sensitive to it.”
Under the proposed plan, which excludes SPAR funding, typical residents would see their potable water, wastewater, stormwater and sanitation bills increase by 7.25%, 7.25%, 17.5% and 7%, respectively. That would raise the average monthly bill, without reclaimed water, from $149.09 to $161.84.
The proposed utility rate program exceeds the administration’s previous projections. Officials also planned to gradually increase sewer capacity (water closet) fees from $350 in 2023 to $1,000.
The fee per restroom increased to $393.75 in 2024 and jumped 52.38% to $600 in fiscal year 2025. However, instead of another 33.33% hike to $800 in 2026, administrators now plan to charge the full $1,000.
Councilmember Richie Floyd has previously voiced his displeasure over the incremental increases and celebrated the accelerated implementation. He also advocated for a fee analysis to ensure “we’re not putting a burden on ratepayers for development.”
Floyd noted that St. Petersburg’s sewer capacity fee is less than half of what Hillsborough County charges. “It’s pretty clear that we are able to justify a lot more,” he said.
“I don’t want ratepayers to subsidize new development – at all.”
Floyd also supported a bond issuance discussion “as soon as possible.” The committee will discuss the measure further at a July 10 meeting.
Pat OBrien
June 19, 2025at7:46 pm
Sure wish the City would key issues for residents instead of all they nice to do projects that have been funded in the past. I constantly hear two overwhelming issues residents face. First, way too many residents are still waiting on the City to approve permits to rebuild. There has to be a quicker way. Second, people starting small businesses face bureaucratic and laborious procedures to get approved by the City to open a business. The City should welcome and help these people instead to standing in the way of progress.
You need to be focused and do a much better job City of St. Petersburg.
joseph boone
June 18, 2025at6:05 pm
They can find $130 million for infrastructure to support a new baseball stadium, but for fixing the city-wide flooding problems that affect all of us, it’s just ‘aspirational’ plans and another 8-9% rate hike for residents.
Bradley Cochran
June 18, 2025at5:51 pm
Rate hikes keep coming, but the city’s stormwater system can’t handle a typical summer rain, let alone a hurricane. At this point, it feels like we’re funding promises.
Lucas Stone
June 18, 2025at1:36 pm
Ohhh so now it makes sense??!! rates go up because we need to fix aging infrastructure and recover the costs. Got it. But when it’s the electric grid, suddenly it’s “why the increase?” “let’s conduct a study,” “this is outrageous,” even if it’s just a short-term bump. Not blaming the city here (though it kinda shows they weren’t exactly on top of things), but let’s be real, this is how all utilities work when stuff starts breaking down.
Alyssa Haley
June 18, 2025at12:27 pm
Another rate hike for infrastructure, but the streets still flood EVERY time it rains, and hurricane season just started. We’re paying more while the city stays just as vulnerable. Where’s the real prep?
julia burke
June 18, 2025at9:45 am
Don’t you just love that they actually ADMIT that it “does take a hurricane” to get services and repairs tended to… Gee, maybe being PROACTIVE would work better.
Leilani Keith
June 18, 2025at9:44 am
This is why I’m having such a hard time with The City of St. Pete taking over the electric grid. They couldn’t figure out the water bills, and these hikes at first glance, seem bigger than what Duke did in Spring. I’m so confused.
Will Michaels
June 16, 2025at9:42 pm
Some 15,000 homes were flooded in last year’s hurricanes in our city. Record weather conditions continue to produce record hurricanes in terms of frequency, intensity, and scope. Our city must adapt to this crisis. The proposed budget for next year now only includes S16.4 Million for SPAR-related projects out of some $545M City estimated need over the next 5 years to deal with increasing rain and hurricane surge. High priority should be given to this need, and all revenue sources should be considered. In addition to a possible increase in utility rates and the possibility of future bond revenue, consideration also should be given to use of any increased ad valorem revenue due to new construction and increased valuation, increased property taxes, reallocation of current revenue, and other.
JAMES GILLESPIE
June 16, 2025at6:32 pm
The increases cited are very damaging to many homeowners and evidence that past mayors and councils failed to make infrastructure improvements in the interest of looking good on paper. Hurricanes are merely part of the story. The one council member who suggests consideration of debt funding makes a case to possibly ease the expense burden to homeowners. At any rate, there should be no salary raises for city administrators for several years and definitely not for council until minimum infrastructure goals are reached. This article is totally unpleasant news to homeowners. The major development downtown will house people who generally can afford the increases. The picture painted in this article is most unpleasant.
HAL FREEDMAN
June 16, 2025at3:53 pm
We are entering another Hurricane season. Let’s stop talking about it, and do what’s necessary. Raising the average bill by the equivalent of a couple of cups of coffee shouldn’t be that big a deal. As Nike says…DO IT!
Lauren Lopez
June 16, 2025at3:26 pm
You are pricing long time residents out of the market. Just because you went 20 years without an increase doesn’t mean it is okay to now expect those of us living here to foot the bill for lack of decent leadership over the years. Florida and St. Petersburg have become ridiculously expensive. Has it ever occurred to you people that you might want to put the brakes on continued development until you get this infrastructure thing taken care of? Do you feel the need to approve every single development plan put in front of you? JUST STOP! We are already overbuilt and bulging at the seams.