Branson finance committee previews proposed 2026 utility rate model as costs surge

Branson’s finance committee received an informational briefing on a proposed 2026 utility rate model that staff say is intended to cover rising operating costs and ongoing capital needs while preserving tourism-tax support for large projects.

The presentation, led by Ben, identified three major cost drivers — health insurance, treatment chemicals and parts, and electricity — and said operating-and-maintenance expenses rose sharply in recent years. Ben told the committee, “Branson City Water serves 33% of the residents,” and projected a typical residential water bill in 2026 of $26.51 (about a $4 increase) and an average sewer bill of $23.13 (about a $3 increase). He said chemicals and parts are rising “30 to 40%” and electric costs are up about 39%.

Why it matters: staff said the city funds some large capital projects with tourism tax revenue to keep residential rates comparatively low, but the tourism fund is under pressure from many upcoming infrastructure needs. Kendall summarized capital priorities — water treatment upgrades, PLC and site-security work, water-tower maintenance, pump rebuilds at roughly 38 lift stations, and an I&I (infiltration and inflow) mitigation program — and warned the scale of projects will strain existing resources.

Kendall described several multi‑million projects that staff plan to stage over the next several years: design work for Lift Station 30 (engineering estimated at $1,200,000 and a proposed construction cost of $12,000,000 planned for 2026–27) and a possible treatment-plant expansion with engineering in 2027 and construction in 2028–29, which staff estimated at roughly $40,000,000. He also said the city is looking at neighborhood water-main improvements that could approach $70,000,000 and that the 20‑year list of large capital items exceeds $200,000,000.

Rate design and equity: committee members pressed staff about the model’s mechanics and whether to maintain a split between residential and commercial increases. Ben and Kendall explained that the model had historically used tourism dollars to subsidize residential rates while allowing higher commercial increases; Kendall said the master-plan review flagged the split-rate approach as uncommon and recommended moving toward similar incremental increases for both classes to avoid pushing commercial rates into an uncompetitive range. Alex said the shift must be clearly justified to residents: “I was trying to help understand when we talk to residents what the spirit and precedent that's been set,” and asked how the proposal would be received by voters who sustain the tourism tax.

What staff recommended and next steps: presenters emphasized this meeting was a first briefing, not a request for approval, and asked committee members to submit follow-up questions. Staff noted the city is moving from ClearGov to a new Tyler module for transparency dashboards by year end and offered to provide the detailed numbers at the October Board briefing and subsequent finance committee meeting. The committee did not take a vote on rates at this session.

The committee’s next formal opportunity to review the proposed budget and any rate recommendations is the October 6 Board briefing followed by the finance committee meeting on October 23, with a first reading to the Board of Aldermen scheduled for October 28.