Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cocoa Beach adopts higher stormwater fee to support major drainage projects
Summary
The commission adopted Resolution 2025-08 to raise the monthly Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) stormwater fee to support stormwater projects and to meet State Revolving Fund rate covenant requirements; commissioners cited multi-million-dollar projects including a Cedarwood/Brevard drainage project estimated at about $8.6 million.
The Cocoa Beach City Commission voted unanimously to adopt Resolution 2025-08, revising the city’s stormwater fees and method for charging customers to strengthen the stormwater fund and support planned drainage and water-quality projects.
The adopted resolution updates the stormwater rate structure the city uses to meet State Revolving Fund (SRF) rate covenant requirements and to position the city to borrow for large projects, staff said.
Morgan Zuelke, stormwater utility manager, told the commission the city is planning several major projects that the rate update will help fund and to make the city eligible for loans. Zuelke said one large project, described as the Cedar Woodham Brevard project, is in the design phase and estimated at about $8,600,000 with a hoped-for construction start in fiscal year 2027. Zuelke also listed a major project at Ramp Road Park and other water-quality work tied to meeting state nutrient requirements.
During discussion, Zuelke summarized the rate impact: “Basically, we would be raising it about 30%,” she said. Commissioners said they preferred raising a dedicated utility fee rather than increasing property tax millage to finance stormwater improvements.
The resolution and accompanying stormwater system rate review were presented as necessary to preserve the city’s ability to access SRF loans and to support maintenance, flood mitigation, and water-quality projects identified in the city’s stormwater master plan. The commission approved the resolution by voice vote with all members present voting in favor.
Staff answered public questions about what specific projects the fee would support and cited the vulnerability assessment and the Cedar Woodham Brevard project among near-term priorities. The vote was procedural and budgetary; the commission did not adopt a detailed construction contract at the meeting.
