Agency approves Gretna boundary change and member‑service agreement allowing temporary service with reimbursement terms

The Sarpy County and Cities Wastewater Agency approved on June 25 a boundary change and a first amended and restated member‑service agreement with the city of Gretna that permits temporary service into new territory and sets a 75% reimbursement arrangement for user rates until authorized costs are repaid.

Agency staff presented a financial model showing the agreement would produce an estimated $30 million in connection fees over the analysis period; the agency would retain those connection fees for system development per the agency master plan. Staff projected about $3.4 million in rate revenue over 13 years from the added area; under the agreement Gretna would retain roughly $2.5 million of that projected rate revenue and remit the remainder to the agency.

Dan Hoins, agency administrator, summarized the timeline of Gretna’s request, noting three years of negotiation and earlier agreements that required varying levels of fee remittance. He said the board’s prior guidance led to the 75% reimbursement structure now reflected in the draft agreement. Hoins said the connection fees are designated to fund agency trunk lines under the board’s master plan.

Gretna Mayor Mike Evans and Gretna staff told the board the change would allow significant development and generate connection fees and other benefits to the agency and county. Evans said the move reflected multi‑year requests by developers and municipal staff and asked the agency to approve the agreement.

During public comment, developer Randy Sump said he owns two 200‑acre parcels, one near 60th and Capehart and another near 120th and Schramm, and said both abut existing development but currently lack an agency extension. “I have 2 200 acre parcels of ground that 1 of them abuts Bellevue,” Sump told the board, and he asked the agency and member cities to pursue ways to fund the extensions so the land could be developed. Sump suggested options including developer‑built infrastructure with reimbursement or jurisdictional agreements to bond extensions.

Board members discussed policy implications. Several members said the Gretna agreement differs from earlier practice because it allows temporary service and reimbursement in ways that may change expectations for future member requests. Some members said they would vote for the agreement while reserving concerns about policy precedent and the need for a consistent written policy for reimbursing member‑led infrastructure.

The resolution was approved; the recorded tally reported five yea votes and one abstention. Members said staff will continue policy work and financial tracking as the agreement is implemented.