The Philadelphia Water Department (PWD), with the help of the Philadelphia Water Rate Board and the advocate appointed by the rate board, will raise water and sewer bills by another 7.8% on Sept. 1 of this year. Unless the Mayor or City Council acts, this will be the seventh consecutive rate hike. Since 2018, with the support of the advocate appointed by the rate board, water bills have gone up by 45%.
The proposed rate increase isn’t called a rate increase. The Water Department, the rate board, and the rate board’s advocate call it a “rate adjustment.” No matter whether it’s called a rate hike or a rate adjustment, consumers will pay more if the increase is allowed.
The Water Department sends a letter to every member of the City Council informing them of the pending “rate adjustment.” But it doesn’t state that bills will increase again unless the City Council acts. One would have to read the attached exhibits to determine how large a rate increase is being imposed on residents. Here is the letter the councilmembers receive:
“The purpose of this correspondence is to provide the Advance Notice (defined below) to
Philadelphia City Council of proposed changes in rates and charges by the Philadelphia Water Department (“Department”) to implement the annual adjustment to the Tiered Assistance Program Rate Rider Surcharge Rates (“TAP-R”) and to revise related water, sewer and fire service connection quantity charges. The proposed changes in rates and charges, if approved by the Philadelphia Water, Sewer and Storm Water Rate Board (“Rate Board”), will take effect on (highlight added) September 1, 2026.”
It’s not an accident that the letter does not specify the size of the rate increase. Its 8%, on top of the 37% increase over the past seven years. Compare this 8% increase to the last wage increase for the people who were out in the cold this winter, collecting the trash and plowing the streets, and they only received a 3% raise.
The Water Department received a portion of the proposed 8% increase from last year’s “black box settlement” with the rate board’s advocate. This is the type of settlement that Governor Shapiro attacked in his budget address and has eliminated at the statewide level because it lacks transparency and accountability. Neither the rate board nor its advocate considered Governor Shapiro’s demand. Instead, they have continued to support the “black box” settlement, which has led to double-digit rate hikes for the Water Department over the last seven years.
On top of being forced to pay for what Governor Shapiro says is unacceptable, Philadelphia water consumers are being forced to pay a surcharge — a tax — to pay for the economic insecurity of so many Philadelphians. Many Philadelphians are having trouble keeping up with the water and sewer bills. Few people have seen their earnings increase by 45% in the last eight years to keep pace with the water bills.
TAP — the program to help — is needed, but its cost is high because there are so many people in Philadelphia experiencing poverty. And because of an agreement with the rate board’s advocate and the Water Department, the costs are paid by surcharging consumers who can keep up with their bills. It is a tax to cover a needed program that helps low-income Philadelphians, but its not paid by everyone.
There has never been a call in Philadelphia to tax food to fund food pantries. The reason is obvious. Income insecurity is created by the structure of our society. All stakeholders bear the burden. Charging sales tax on food or water, as the rate board’s advocate supports, means the cost of the program is paid by consumers, not real estate investors or businesses that don’t have a physical footprint in the city, like Amazon and Uber. It is a regressive tax on working people. The less a person earns, the higher the percentage of their income that goes toward their water bill. Forcing people to pay for low-income programs through a tax on their water bills means the lower your income, the higher your tax burden. Not even President Trump has suggested such a tax.
Low-income programs for housing, SEPTA, and other needs are funded from the city’s operating budget. Every stakeholder pays, and the more one makes, the more one contributes. There is no reason why the Water Department’s low-income plan should be different.
Why does the rate board’s advocate support the sales tax, which it calls a surcharge? Could it have something to do with who runs the rate board’s advocate? The no-bid contract is given to Community Legal Services (CLS). CLS is run by its board of directors. Its executive committee is as follows: President Kimberly Takacs, Esq., a corporate lawyer; Vice President Pat Devine, Esq., a corporate lawyer; Secretary Shelly Solomon, Esq., a corporate lawyer; and Treasurer Valentine A. Brown, Esq., a corporate lawyer.
Of the 16 CLS board members — whose affiliations are disclosed — 14 are corporate lawyers, one is a client, and one is a law professor. The entire executive committee is made up of corporate lawyers. Overall, 90% of the identified board members are corporate lawyers.
No doubt every member of CLS’s board is dedicated. But the decision not to have a client group advise the rate board’s advocate and accept or reject settlements is telling. It’s no secret that a $20-a-month tax on water bills to pay for those who can’t afford service looks different to people who make $250,000 a year than to those who make $25,000. Nor is it a secret that many of the corporations the CLS board represents are not asked to pay for the cost of the low-income program under the current “black box” agreement.
With so many people struggling to pay utility bills, is this the year that the City Council asks why the water bills keep going up?
Our reporters sit through hours of city council meetings, dig through piles of documents, and ask tough questions other media overlook. Because we’re committed to addressing Philadelphia’s poverty crisis — and challenging those who sustain it. If you think this work is important too, please support our journalism.
We’re counting on readers like you.
