Will St. Pete pull the plug on Duke? 

St. Petersburg has taken the first step toward exploring what it would take to replace Duke Energy with a municipal utility, a move that would end a nearly 126-year-old relationship.

A city council committee voted in favor of drafting a resolution instructing Mayor Ken Welch’s administration to request bids from consultancy firms for a feasibility study. The motion passed 2-1 after Councilmember Corey Givens Jr. said officials should “pump the brakes” and left the July 31 meeting without voting.

Councilmembers Richie Floyd and Brandi Gabbard provided the two affirmative votes 18 months after they first broached the idea. St. Petersburg’s 30-year contract with Duke ends in August 2026, and community support for a grassroots “Dump Duke” campaign has swelled amid criticism over soaring electricity costs.

Givens subsequently expressed his concerns Sunday night in a social media post. “Real people are facing real problems and they need real solutions NOW, not later,” he wrote.

“I’m open to exploring the idea of ‘dumping Duke Energy,’ but not if it means burdening taxpayers more than they already are,” Givens continued. “Duke pays the city $24 million in franchise fees annually. I say we allocate a portion of those funds … so that we can provide utility bill assistance to customers NOW, not later.”

Clearwater’s leadership allocated $500,000 to weigh the pros and cons of establishing a municipal utility in August 2024. That study loomed over the committee meeting, and Floyd said he tried to wait until after its completion to have the discussion.

However, he and Gabbard noted St. Petersburg is running out of time. The entire city council must still pass the resolution, then approve a contract with the selected consultant.

Councilmember Gina Driscoll voted against the resolution. Council Chair Copley Gerdes and Councilmembers Mike Harting and Deborah Figgs-Sanders attended the meeting without casting a vote,

Driscoll, Gerdes and Harting doubted the city’s ability to create a publicly owned utility, much less anytime soon. Figgs-Sanders wanted more information from a study.

“We have no time to pump the brakes,” Gabbard said. “I almost feel like we don’t have enough time to get it (a study) done. I just think we owe it to the residents of the City of St. Petersburg … they want us to at least try, to at least see what it looks like.”

Gabbard noted that “overwhelming numbers” of residents continue calling on elected officials to explore replacing investor-owned Duke with a nonprofit utility. She said they are “very realistic about what the outcome may be.”

In a prepared statement sent Tuesday morning, Duke spokesperson Ana Gibbs said the conglomerate remains focused on “what we’ve delivered for more than 125 years in St. Petersburg – supporting our customers 365 days a year and also when they need us the most.”

“We value our relationship with St. Petersburg and continue to work with them each day on projects, opportunities and addressing concerns,” Gibbs added. “Our commitment to our customers remains stronger than ever.”

She noted that St. Petersburg-based Duke Florida employs about 500 people in the city and approximately 4,000 statewide. Gibbs said the company has cooperated with Clearwater’s consultant.

Floyd said the city could use the money it spends on Duke’s convoluted, subscription-based Clean Energy Connection Program to pay for the study. Pinellas County commissioners voted to end their participation in April.

While Dukes’s ability to help St. Petersburg achieve its clean energy goals is a concern, most residents bemoan the continuously increasing costs. Givens, just before exiting, asked if Duke would commit to lowering rates if the city extended its contract.

Community relations manager Jeff Baker stressed that state regulators set rates and Duke could not lower costs for one municipality. However, the city could dedicate the $24 million it receives annually from the company for right-of-way use to struggling residents.

Duke recoups that money from customers. Local monthly bills include a $10.26 municipal franchise fee and a $16.83 municipal utility tax.

City administrator Rob Gerdes said officials typically use one-time state or federal funding to assist residents. “After looking at the budget today, I don’t believe we have any general fund dollars set aside for electrical utility assistance.”

Ursula Schryver, a senior vice president with the lobbying firm American Public Power Association, said municipal utilities offer local decision-making, a low-cost structure and serve the community rather than investors. Over 2,000 cities, including Orlando, have publicly-owned electricity.

Winter Park is a recent success story and established its municipal utility outside of Orlando in 2005. “It’s kind of a lopsided, David and Goliath kind of effort, because the investor-owned utility does fight it,” Schryver said.

“That’s really the primary reason that most of them have failed.”

A study commissioned by Duke determined it would cost Clearwater over $1 billion to seize the utility’s assets and provide power for roughly 120,000 residents and businesses. St. Petersburg has about twice that city’s customers.

Council Chair Gerdes said a $2 billion price tag would require $80 “on every bill, just for the debt service of creating the utility. That’s without the creation of power. That’s where I think the Clearwater study will help.”

Investor-owned Florida Power & Light recently asked state regulators to approve a nearly $10 billion rate hike that could set nationwide precedents for electricity regulation. Congresswoman Kathy Castor’s office said Tuesday that 5.3 million households would see their annual bills increase by $360 over two years.

The Health, Energy, Resiliency and Sustainability Committee’s resolution is not currently on the Aug. 7 or Aug. 14 city council agenda.