Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Connection Fee topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

St. Pete Beach consultant proposes higher wastewater connection fee; committee warned near‑term revenues would be modest

St. Pete Beach Finance & Budget Review Committee · July 8, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Graftalus calculated an updated wastewater connection fee of $4,649 per ERU (about 45% higher than the current $3,216). Staff said connection‑fee revenue will be small under low growth assumptions unless redevelopment or large meter upgrades occur.

The Finance & Budget Review Committee reviewed a consultant’s update to the city’s wastewater connection fee on July 7. Using current includable capital assets (net of grants), planned expansion projects and system capacity, Graftalus calculated a recommended connection fee of $4,649 per equivalent residential unit (ERU), up about $1,433, or roughly 45%, from the current $3,216.

Sean Ocasio of Graftalus said the fee is a cost‑per‑unit derivation: total includable capital investment divided by system capacity scaled to the city’s level of service (250 gallons per ERU per day). “Based on the updated analysis, including all those investments you’ve made since the last time this type of study was conducted… the calculated fee would then be $4,649 per unit,” he said.

Committee members asked how the fee would be applied. Staff clarified that the connection fee is charged to new development or redevelopment that increases demand (for example, when meter sizes are enlarged) and is not typically charged for a like‑for‑like rebuild of an existing connection. Ocasio said that under the city’s low projected growth assumptions — roughly two new ERUs a year in the forecast used — the updated fee would generate only modest additional revenue (on the order of tens of thousands of dollars annually under those assumptions). Larger revenue potential depends on redevelopment intensity and meter‑size changes.

Next steps: staff will incorporate the updated fee into commission materials and ensure statutory compliance in implementation. The committee asked staff to quantify potential revenue under higher redevelopment scenarios and to show example impacts (e.g., meter sizes commonly used by hotels and larger commercial properties).