Our water infrastructure: Extolling low rates only increases inequities

We are seeing firsthand in Jackson, Miss., the true costs of not investing in water infrastructure. 

In an anthem often repeated in communities across America, low rates are championed as the benchmark against which water systems are judged. What we don’t see or hear about is the rapidly aging infrastructure under our feet, malfunctioning pumps at the water treatment plants and the significant price tags associated with providing safe, reliable water and wastewater service.

If there is an overarching lesson to be learned from the water tragedies of Flint, Newark, Baltimore and Jackson, it is that — as a country — we must place as much emphasis on infrastructure investment and water quality as we do on rates. Ending the mindset that cheapest is best would allow communities, no matter the zip code, to have water that is safe to drink and toilets that can be flushed without polluting the environment.

Water that is unsafe to drink is unjust at any cost.

Water providers, elected officials and activists cannot continue to buy into the rhetoric that low rates are paramount to any other consideration. If people insist on looking solely at rates, then the true cost to ratepayers of systems’ failures, such as the need to buy bottled drinking water or having no service at all, must be included in these calculations.

Efforts to keep rates artificially low means that some water and wastewater providers do not have the resources needed to properly maintain infrastructure. Low rates directly translate into deferring the work needed to protect public health and our environment. Perpetuating the cycle of underinvestment has resulted in failing infrastructure and poor water quality that disproportionately impacts communities of color and rural communities.

Water equity must be the driver. Water equity means that water systems must abide by the basic principles of meeting water quality standards, addressing fundamental flaws in our water grid and investing in infrastructure, while offering customer assistance to protect our most vulnerable citizens. This is the way that we move all Americans closer to making certain that everyone has access to safe, reliable water at affordable rates — no matter where you live.

By way of comparison, our country expects, and often mandates, electric generators to invest in new technologies, like wind and solar, to protect the environment even though those technologies often increase the price of electricity. In doing so, we as a society are signaling that having clean air is a priority over artificially low rates. The same must be true for water and wastewater.

To better appreciate the hesitancy to spend money to improve water and wastewater infrastructure, one must understand that the nation’s water and wastewater service providers are highly fragmented. About 50,000 systems operate throughout the United States — compared to just 3,300 electric utilities. Government-run systems serve about 88 percent of the population.

Time and again we see local elected officials, or those who are appointed by them, struggle to balance investing in the system with politically unpopular rate increases required to make those improvements. Contrast that with the America’s water companies, which understand the importance of maintaining water quality while still focusing on affordability. The 10 largest private water utilities alone invest $3.9 billion annually in their systems to ensure their customers have safe, reliable and affordable service. The result of this investment is clear. These water companies also have the superior compliance rates with EPA safe drinking water standards.

The reality that is playing out across the United States is that putting off infrastructure upgrades to avoid increasing water rates does more harm over time than incremental investment. Over time, the price of doing nothing only continues to build. It’s an extraordinary bill that aways comes due. The now $1 billion price tag to address the issues in Jackson, Miss., is a prime example of this.

Yes, increased infrastructure investment will inevitably put upward pressure on rates, which is why we must do more to protect our neighbors in need. Congress must provide permanent funding for a low-income water assistance program. States must change antiquated laws that prevent water utilities from implementing customer assistance programs. 

Not doing anything to fix broken systems in the name of protecting our poorest citizens jeopardizes everyone’s health and access to safe, reliable water service. It is far beyond the time to prioritize providing high-quality service, while at the same time designing rate structures and assistance programs to help ensure continuity of service for those who need it. 

The federal government made a valiant attempt to assist with the issue in passing the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Unfortunately, given the state of water infrastructure in the United States the $50 billion is merely a drop in the bucket. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates the investment gap in water and wastewater infrastructure will grow to $434 billion by 2029.

Continuing down this path of elevating the importance of low rates above all else means water and wastewater infrastructure in our cities and towns will continue fall into disrepair, resulting in water unsafe to drink, unreliable service, boil water notices, raw sewage discharges into streams and other environmental harms that hurt our communities and our economy.

There is a better path, and now is the time to start following it.

Robert F. Powelson is the president and CEO of the National Association of Water Companies (NAWC). He joined NAWC after serving on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Powelson previously served on the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission from 2008-2017, spending four years as Commission chairman. Powelson is the past president of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) and chairman of NARUC Committee on Water.