Manatee County proposes multi‑year user‑rate increases to finance $1.7B utility CIP

Manatee County staff and consultants presented a draft monthly user‑rate plan at a Nov. 5 work session that aims to fund a larger capital program and higher debt service while keeping utilities as an enterprise fund supported by user charges.

“We have about 84 million gallons a day permitted water treatment capacity and about 3 and 3 county owned wastewater treatment plants combining for about 33.5 MGD of capacity,” the consultant said in laying out system scale, and later added that the county’s original‑cost utility asset base of about $1.6 billion equates to roughly $3.2 billion in today’s dollars. The consultant described a five‑year CIP of about $1.7 billion and projected roughly $1.0 billion in new debt issuances to help fund that work.

The recommended rate path averages an 8.75% annual adjustment, which the consultant said equates to about a $10‑per‑month increase on the average residential combined bill in the forecast period; the same presentation showed the next‑year bill rising from roughly $99.26 to $108.93 under the first year of the plan. Staff noted that the plan would meet basic debt‑coverage metrics for investment‑grade borrowing while acknowledging it would not reach a hypothetical AAA Moody’s cash‑reserve target (about 250 days). “The average bill…the adjustments that we're asking for is 8.75% a year,” the consultant said.

Commissioners asked about affordability, alternatives and contingency planning. Commissioner Ballard and others said the expected monthly increase would be difficult for many fixed‑income households; the consultant said prior affordability work (from the 2023 study) found the most affected households were concentrated inside some municipalities and that staff could update distributional analyses. The board also discussed PFAS treatment: staff said measured PFAS levels in county source water are low (about 0.75 parts per trillion versus a 4 ppt reference value cited in the presentation) and that a full‑scale PFAS treatment facility could cost on the order of $100 million if required.

Staff and consultants described financing options — traditional bonds, state revolving funds, WIFIA and structuring/phasing projects to match funding capacity — and warned that lowering coverage to mitigate rate impacts could raise borrowing costs. County CFO Sheila McLean said staff and the county’s financial advisers are examining financing timing, underwriter input and phasing to take advantage of current ratings and market conditions.

No rate ordinance or resolution was adopted at the session. Staff said the package is a draft pending FY25 actuals and board input; they recommended annual reviews of the financial plan and pledged to return with refined numbers once final FY25 financials are available.

Ending note: the presenters said the county can continue to issue bonds under the proposed plan, but the board must weigh near‑term affordability against long‑term credit metrics and the need to fund a large reinvestment program.