Surging Water Costs amid the US Affordability Crisis

What You’ll Learn From This Report

Summary

Households across the United States are grappling with rising drinking water bills, stretching their ability to make ends meet.¹Understanding Water Affordability Across Contexts: LIHWAP Water Utility Affordability Survey Report (Office of Community Services, 2024), 4–5, 22, 31. Food & Water Watch compiled and analyzed water billing data for the 500 largest community water systems in 2025, which collectively served 155 million people (45% of the US). We compared typical household water bills in 2025 to those in 2015, using data from the previous Food & Water Watch investigation.

Key Findings

• From 2015 to 2025, household drinking water bills increased faster than inflation, grocery prices, and median household income. The average community water system increased household drinking water bills by 62%.
• Water bills increased at 1.6 times the overall inflation rate and more than 2 times the rate for groceries.
• Water bills increased 19% faster than the US median household income, forcing households to spend a higher portion of their stretched incomes on water.
• In Louisiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, and West Virginia, water bills grew about twice as fast as their corresponding statewide median household incomes.

Drinking water bills varied widely across the US in 2025

• The average water system charged a typical household $531 for drinking water service in 2025 (assuming 60,000 gallons of water use).
• The least expensive system charged typical households just $133, while the most expensive system charged $1,416.
• The 25 most expensive systems charged households more than $1,000 for water in 2025, while the 25 least expensive systems charged less than $260.
• Water bills varied widely by state, with the average West Virginia system charging the highest water bills ($1,383) and the average Idaho system charging the lowest ($286).
• Water bills were unaffordable for low-income households in nearly all (93%) of the analyzed water systems.
• Drinking water bills were unaffordable for the median household in West Virginia, where half of households served by the largest systems were charged at least 2.3% of their income for water. For low-income households in the state, water bills amounted to an alarming 11% of their income.
• The worst affordability crisis was in Puerto Rico, where the largest systems charged typical households water bills exceeding 3.5% of their income. Low-income households were charged a dangerous 20% of their income.

Corporate water systems charged more than public systems

• For-profit water corporations charged typical households an average of $823 for water in 2025, compared to $494 charged by publicly owned systems. This means water corporations charged $329 more for water (67% more) than public systems did.
• The average public system charged typical households less in 2025 than what the average water corporation charged a decade ago in 2015 ($501).
• The gap in pricing between public and corporate water systems widened, with the average corporation increasing water bills by $157 more than the average public system over 10 years.

Without action to restore federal support for public water systems and rein in corporate water abuses, water bills will continue to increase faster than households can reasonably absorb. Every level of government must take action to ensure safe, affordable, locally controlled water for all.

Find Your Water System

Industrial pollution, aging infrastructure, and federal disinvestment are fueling a crisis for the nation’s water systems.²Drinking Water: 2025 Infrastructure Report Card (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2025), 60, 62, 66; Nadia Gaber et al., “The Devil They Knew: Chemical Documents Analysis of Industry Influence on PFAS Science,” Annals of Global Health 89, no. 1 (2023): 2, 11, https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4013; Michael Hawthorne, “Great Waste in the Great Lakes: How Plastic Pollution Is Clogging Our Waters,” Chicago Tribune, August 19, 2026; Kurtis Alexander, “California’s Water Shortages Partly Due to Climate Change from Big Oil and Gas, Study Finds,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 25, 2026. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), drinking water systems will need $625 billion in upgrades over the next two decades just to comply with existing water quality standards.³Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey & Assessment: 7th Report to Congress, EPA 810R23001 (US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2023), 6. The agency recognized that this figure is likely an underestimate,⁴Water Affordability Needs Assessment: Report to Congress, EPA 830R24015 (EPA, 2024), 5. and the American Water Works Association estimated the need at nearly $1 trillion ($960 billion).⁵J. Mastracchio et al., Beyond the Replacement Era: Balancing Compounding Infrastructure Needs with Household Affordability (American Water Works Association, 2026), 3.

On top of this, climate change-driven droughts and other severe weather patterns continue to threaten water supplies and infrastructure globally,⁶Weronika Rosińska et al., “Climate Change’s Ripple Effect on Water Supply Systems and the Water-Energy Nexus: A Review,” Water Resources & Industry 32 (2024): 1, 4–5, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wri.2024.100266. generating expenses that will be pushed onto ratepayers.⁷Jennifer Skerker et al., “Urban Water Affordability Crisis Exacerbated by Climate Change,” Nature Sustainability, (2026): 1–2, 4, 6, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-026-01890-z. Continued expansion of water-intensive industries like factory farming⁸Factory Farm Nation: 2024 (Food & Water Watch, 2024), 2–3. and hyperscale data centers also compound
threats on local water supplies.⁹The Urgent Case Against Data Centers (Food & Water Watch, 2026), 5–6. Big Agriculture, the largest contributor of nutrient pollution in the US,¹⁰Meredith M. Brehob et al., “The US EPA’s National Nutrient Inventory: Critical Shifts in US Nutrient Pollution Sources from 1987 to 2017,” Environmental Science & Technology 59, no. 51 (2025): 27836, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5c08196. is another driver of drinking water costs in the country¹¹“Nutrient Pollution: The Effects: Economy,” EPA (website), updated March 12, 2026, https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/effects-economy. due to the price tag of treatment and mitigation.¹²Gemma Del Rossi et al., “The Economics of Nutrient Pollution from Agriculture,” Annual Review of Resource Economics 15 (2023): 113–15, 117–18, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-021317; Astrid Cullman et al., “External Costs of Water Pollution in the Drinking Water Supply Sector,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 107, no. 2 (2024): 527, https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12490. The rapid expansion of data centers to fuel Big Tech is expected to require up to $58 billion in infrastructure upgrades that would primarily burden local communities,¹³Yuelin Han et al., “Small Bottle, Big Pipe: Quantifying and Addressing the Impact of Data Centers on Public Water Systems,” Working paper (arXiv, 2026): 4. with higher costs passed on to everyday ratepayers.¹⁴Mastracchio et al., Beyond the Replacement Era, 10.

All these factors make upgrading infrastructure both a priority and a critical challenge for many water utilities.¹⁵2025 Infrastructure Report Card, 60, 66. Because federal support failed to keep up with the needs of water systems, state and local spending on water infrastructure quadrupled over the past 60 years¹⁶2025 Infrastructure Report Card, 62; Jonathan L. Ramseur, Wastewater Infrastructure Funding: Background and Affordability Issues, R48565 (Congressional Research Service, 2025), 6–7; Mastracchio et al., Beyond the Replacement Era, 22–23. and forced water systems to fund improvements through rate hikes.¹⁷Understanding Water Affordability, 4; Sarah Kaplan, “Water Costs Are Rising Faster Than Inflation—and Sending Bills Soaring,” Washington Post, May 13, 2026. While the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law of 2021 provided a five-year infusion of water funding, this support ended in fiscal year 2026.¹⁸Elena H. Humphreys, Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs: Background & Issues for Congress, R47878 (Congressional Research Service, 2023), 1; 2025 Infrastructure Report Card, 62. Moreover, in 2025, and again in 2026, the Trump administration proposed eliminating the primary source of federal support for local drinking water and wastewater projects altogether, which would cut $2.46 billion in funding, leaving a scant $305 million for states as they “adjust to alternative funding sources.”¹⁹Russell T. Vought to Susan Collins, Chair, Committee on Appropriations, US Senate, “Major Discretionary Funding Changes,” May 2, 2025, 14–15, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Fiscal-Year-2026-Discretionary-Budget-Request.pdf; FY 2027 EPA Budget in Brief, EPA-190-R-26-001 (EPA, 2026), 6.

Given this difficult federal landscape and growing challenges for water systems, water service is likely to become unaffordable for more households. Unfortunately, no federal agency tracks household billing information from drinking water utilities.²⁰Water Affordability Needs Assessment, 22. To fill this gap and shine light on the critical issue of water affordability, Food & Water Watch compiled a unique and comprehensive analysis of household water bills for the 500 largest community water systems in the US in 2025. These systems collectively served 155 million people nationwide (45% of the country). For each system, we calculated the annual water bill for a typical household using 60,000 gallons of water (the estimated annual indoor usage).

*The bills do not include wastewater or stormwater charges because many jurisdictions have separate utilities providing those services.
(See Methodology for more information.)

In 2025, the average US water system charged households $531 a year for 60,000 gallons of water, but bills varied greatly across the country. A public water system in Hempstead, New York charged $133, while a corporate system in San Jose, California charged $1,416—a ten-fold difference.

Drinking water bills also varied widely by state. Idaho had the lowest bills, where its three largest systems charged an average of $286. West Virginia had the highest bills, where its two largest systems—owned by American Water—charged an average of $1,383. In both West Virginia and Puerto Rico, the largest systems charged drinking water bills that were unaffordable for the typical household. Typical water bills exceeded 2.3% of median household income in West Virginia and 3.5% of median household income in Puerto Rico.

Most expensive systems

The 25 most expensive water systems charged more than $1,000 a year for basic household drinking water service. Key trends include:

• Corporate systems were overrepresented: While only 11% of the 500 systems in the dataset were privately owned, 44% of the top 25 most expensive systems and 70% of the top 10 were owned by for-profit corporations.
• California was overrepresented: More than half (52%) of the 25 most expensive systems were in California, whereas California systems represented just 18% of the 500 systems in the dataset. Several factors could have contributed to this trend. Coastal cities in Southern California and the Bay Area that pay higher rates purchase their water (directly or indirectly) from the State Water Project,²¹“Water Source Map,” San Jose Water, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.sjwater.com/water-source-map; “State Water Project,” Santa Clara Valley Water District, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.valleywater.org/your-water/where-your-water-comes/imported-water/state-water-project; California State Water Boards, “A Momentous Occasion: State-funded, Innovative Wastewater Recycling Plant Opens in Escondido,” news release, August 28, 2024; “Water Supply,” City of Santa Maria, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/services/departments/utilities-department/water-services; 2025 Water Quality Report (City of Oceanside, 2025), 10, 11; “SWP Contractors,” California Department of Water Resources, accessed August 12, 2026, https://water.ca.gov/programs/state-water-project/management/swp-water-contractors; “Water Treatment,” Helix Water District, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.hwd.com/258/Water-Treatment; “Water Information,” Otay Water District, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.otaywater.gov/about-otay/water-information; “Central Basin West,” Golden State Water Company, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.gswater.com/central-basin-west; “Our Water,” Vista Irrigation District, accessed August 12, 2026, https://www.vidwater.org/our-water. which pumps water through an extensive network of conveyance and storage infrastructure.²²California’s State Water Project (State Water Contractors, 2019), 1.
  
  In the face of drought and water supply issues,²³Noah Garrison et al., Free Water While It Lasts: An Analysis of Wholesale Water Pricing in the Lower Colorado River Basin States (UCLA Institute of the Environment & Sustainability, 2025), 10. some California systems pursued costly alternative water supply projects like desalination.²⁴Patrick McDonough and Courtney Brown, “Why Is Your Water Bill So High? The Story Behind San Diego’s Rising Rates,” San Diego Coastkeeper, April 23, 2026; Drew Tuma and Tim Didion, “California’s Water Crisis Driving Higher Interest in Desalination as a New Source,” ABC7 News, June 21, 2026. For example, a recent study on drought in Santa Cruz, California, found that droughts and the subsequent costs to improve resilience could double the average household’s water bills.²⁵Skerker et al., “Urban Water Affordability Crisis,” 3, 6. In areas of dwindling water supply, whether following a drought or not, energy-intensive processes are used to extract, treat, and move water,²⁶Rosińska et al., “Climate Change’s Ripple Effect,” 9. translating into higher costs for utilities and ratepayers.
• Surface water was often more expensive: All but one of the 25 most expensive systems relied on surface water, including seven systems that primarily purchased their surface water from other systems. Compared to groundwater wells, surface water is often more expensive because it is more vulnerable to contamination and requires additional treatment.²⁷Eva Horváthová, “Analysis of Drinking Water Treatment Costs—with an Application to Groundwater Purification,” One Ecosystem 7 (2022): 7–8, https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.7.e82125.

Least expensive systems

In comparison, the 25 least expensive water systems charged typical households less than $260 a year for water service. Key trends include:

• Public ownership dominated: The 25 least expensive water systems were all publicly owned.
• Water bills were more affordable: Typical water bills charged by the 25 least expensive systems made up less than 0.5% of their state’s median income in 2024.
• Many were in the South and included growing cities: 60% of the least expensive systems were in the South, including many in Florida and Georgia. Many also served rapidly growing cities including Dallas, Orlando, and Phoenix, each of which increased its service population by more than 100,000 people from 2015 to 2025. Some systems may have had water rate structures that relied on revenue from higher water users (e.g., households that water lawns or fill swimming pools).²⁸
  Brahm Resnik, “‘Make Changes Now’: Phoenix Water Users Face Higher Bills If They Don’t Conserve,” 12 News (AZ), March 20, 2023. In some cases, their rate structures may have included a certain amount of water in the base or meter charge and only charged volumetric rates when that amount was exceeded.²⁹Ahmed Rachid El-Khattabi et al., “Keep Your Head Above Water: Explaining Disparities in Local Drinking Water Bills,” PLOS Water 2, no. 12(2023): 12, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000190. A study based on our 2015 dataset found that newer water systems also charged lower bills compared to those in older localities, which have aging systems that require expensive replacements and updates.³⁰X. Zhang et al., “Water Pricing and Affordability in the US: Public vs. Private Ownership,” Water Policy 24, no. 3 (2022): 508,
  https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2022.283.
• They included larger service areas: The 25 least expensive systems collectively served 30% more people than the 25 most expensive systems, allowing costs to be spread among more users.³¹El-Khattabi et al., “Keep Your Head Above Water,” 13.

Corporate control of water systems is associated with higher water bills. Among the nation’s 500 largest systems, for-profit, corporate-owned systems charged on average 67% more than public systems. Local governments charged an average of $494 for water service in 2025, while water corporations charged $823—or an additional $329.

The impact of corporate ownership varied by state. In Illinois and Indiana, the average corporate-owned water system charged more than twice as much as the average local government system. For example, local government systems in Illinois charged an average of $529 in 2025, compared to $1,109 by water corporations. And in Indiana, the average local government charged $444 compared to $900 by corporate systems.

Each state has a utility regulatory agency, often called a Public Utility Commission, that oversees the rates charged by for-profit water corporations. A study based on our 2015 report found that private water systems in states with corporate-friendly regulatory environments were statistically more likely to have higher household water bills and less affordable water. That study found that private ownership was the biggest factor associated with higher costs—outstripping aging infrastructure and drought.³²Zhang et al., “Water Pricing and Affordability,” 508.

Since 2015, the cost of corporate control has only gotten higher. Between 2015 and 2025, the average corporation increased water bills faster than the average local government (67% compared to 62%).In addition, water corporations were already charging higher rates in 2015, and this difference widened by an additional 12%. In fact, the average local government charged less in 2025 ($494) than the average corporate system charged in 2015 ($501).

Household drinking water bills rose 62% over the last decade, adding nearly $200 a year onto household water costs.† The 25 most expensive systems increased bills by an average of $637 in the past decade, a 124% rate hike. The 25 least expensive systems increased bills by $58, or 44%.

The top three states with the highest average rate hikes were New Hampshire (177%), Oregon (114%), and West Virginia (95%).

Rate changes among individual systems ranged from a 308% increase in Daly City, California, to a 26% decrease in Orange County, Florida. In the latter case, the Reedy Creek Improvement District dissolved, and the system was taken over by the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District in 2022.³³“About Central Florida Tourism Oversight District,” Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, accessed August 14, 2026, https://www.oversightdistrict.org. This marked an end to Disney’s private, self-governing status and a transition to public governance.³⁴“Gov. DeSantis Signs Law, State Takes Control of Disney’s Reedy Creek District,” CBS, February 27, 2023. In total, nine systems nationwide lowered typical water bills over the last decade likely due to changes in rate design.

Various factors drove rate increases in different communities. For example, New Hampshire’s largest water system, Manchester Water Works, saw its debt payments nearly double (75% increase) and its water treatment chemical purchases almost triple (143% increase) from 2015 to 2023.

Nationally, water infrastructure is aging, and water pipes are reaching the end of their life expectancy. Utilities feel the strain of expensive replacements as federal financial support has been stripped down over the last several decades.³⁵2025 Infrastructure Report Card, 60, 62. Federal and state regulation is attempting to catch up to growing public health concerns about contaminants like PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances)—or “forever chemicals”—but in the absence of dedicated federal support, the financial burden has fallen on utilities and ratepayers.³⁶Mastracchio et al., Beyond the Replacement Era, 11, 12.

Corporations responsible for the PFAS crisis went unchecked for decades while polluting local waters.³⁷Gaber et al., “Devil They Knew,” 2, 11. Despite known harms, these corporations ultimately expanded the reach of PFAS into everyday life, to the point where virtually everywhere today is grappling with PFAS water contamination.³⁸Erika Ryan et al., “PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ Are Everywhere. Here’s What You Should Know About Them,” NPR, updated June 23, 2022; PFAS and the Chemistry of Concealment (Food & Water Watch, 2023), 3–4. Cleanup costs are estimated to go into the billions.³⁹2025 Infrastructure Report Card, 63, 65.

Utilities must grapple with the cost of adapting to climate change. In 2024, utilities ranked increasing their resilience to climate extremes and uncertainties as a top priority.⁴⁰State of the Water Industry: 2024 (American Water Works Association, 2024), 10. The upgrades needed to face a volatile climate will require substantial investments in order to avert the potential billion- to trillion-dollar costs of long-term climate disasters.⁴¹Mastracchio et al., Beyond the Replacement Era, 8. The American Water Works Association estimated that these climate-specific needs would cost drinking water utilities up to $617 billion over the next 25 years.⁴²Mastracchio et al., 8. In Oregon, water systems in Portland and in the Tualatin Valley Water District recently moved forward with million-to-billion dollar water projects in the name of long-term resiliency and infrastructure overhauls funded by major rate increases.⁴³Wright Gazaway, “Tualatin Valley Water District Makes Progress on $1.6B Water System Project,” KATU2 ABC (OR), April 19, 2024; Daniel Kool, “Portland Water District Approves Largest Rate Increase in 10 Years,” Portland Press Herald, updated November 28, 2025; Wright Gazaway, “Portland Water Rates Could Double Within a Decade Due to Bull Run Filtration Site,” KATU2 ABC (OR), April 27, 2026; Lauren Bishop, “Comment Period for Significant TVWD Rate Hike Open Until Aug. 24,” Your Oregon News, August 18, 2023.

† Not every system that made the top 500 in 2015 also made the rankings in 2025. See Methodology for more information.

The average utility increased typical water bills 1.6 times faster than inflation from 2015 to 2025. While consumer prices rose 39%, water bills soared 62%.⁴⁴“All Items in U.S. City Average, All Urban Consumers, Not Seasonally Adjusted,” US Bureau of Labor Statistics, data from 2015 to 2025, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0. Water bills similarly outpaced the inflation of basic essentials, growing over twice as fast as groceries (30% inflation) and eggs (28% inflation).⁴⁵“Food at Home in US City Average, All Urban Consumers, Seasonally Adjusted,” US Bureau of Labor Statistics, data from 2015 to 2025, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SAF11; “Eggs, Grade A, Large, per doz. in US City Average, Average Price, Not Seasonally Adjusted,” US Bureau of Labor Statistics, data from 2015 to 2025, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/APU0000708111.

Typical water bills increased 19% faster than the national median household income. From 2014 to 2024, the median household income in the US increased 52%‡ —not enough to keep up with rising water bills. In Louisiana, Maryland, and West Virginia, water bills grew about twice as fast as state median household incomes, while in New Hampshire, they grew nearly five times faster.

A handful of states saw their median household incomes grow faster than household water bills, including Georgia, Idaho, Montana, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Washington. For example, South Dakota’s median household income rose 51%, while water bills rose 18%.

‡ 2025 data was unavailable. See Methodology for more information.

Water affordability is a deepening crisis for low-income households, which paid a higher portion of their income on drinking water service. Affordability is a complicated metric. The California State Water Board uses a threshold of 1.5% of household income as a standard of affordability; however, the threshold is based on median household income,⁴⁶Kristyn Abhold et al., 2023 Drinking Water Needs Assessment (California State Water Resources Control Board, 2023), 10. which does not capture affordability concerns for low-income households. This assessment takes a similar approach by using half of what the EPA considers to be a high water burden for low-income households (1.5%) and applying it against lowest-quintile income.§

Water bills were unaffordable for low-income households in nearly all (93%) of water systems in the study. These systems charged water bills that exceeded 1.5% of household income for the poorest fifth of households in the state. In only two states, Idaho and Utah, the average water system charged water bills that were affordable for low-income households.

While utilities face many external challenges beyond their control that contribute to unaffordable water service, some systems also make financial choices that exacerbate the problem for low-income households. Some utilities have begun relying more on fixed charges and fees rather than on tiered consumption charges, a move that has contributed to worsening water affordability over time.⁴⁷Water Affordability Needs Assessment, 8. Temporary bursts of capital support and comparatively small amounts of federal funding do little to ameliorate the issue.⁴⁸Mastracchio et al., Beyond the Replacement Era, ES-2.

Making water less affordable forces households to make hard decisions about what essential expenses to cut back on, such as food or education. This can lead to families forgoing necessary medication and experiencing hunger and mental health declines.⁴⁹Water Affordability Needs Assessment, 9. When households cannot afford to pay their water bills, utilities may pursue punitive collection measures like shutting off water service or sending a home to tax sale.⁵⁰Water Affordability Needs Assessment, 9, 45. Without access to affordable water, households may struggle to meet basic needs like cooking, cleaning, and sanitation.⁵¹Public Library of Science, “Millions of US Households May Struggle to Afford Basic Water Services,” PHYS, May 10, 2023.

Water crises in Puerto Rico and West Virginia

Puerto Rico and West Virginia—which are in the middle of serious water crises—had the most unaffordable systems by far in 2025. In Puerto Rico, typical low-income households were charged 20% of their household income for water service. West Virginia’s largest systems charged typical low-income households 11% of their household income for basic water service. These charges were simply unaffordable by any metric.

Infrastructure projects are expensive, especially in poorer states like West Virginia where depopulation means fewer customers available to spread costs for upgrades.⁵²Caity Coyne and Lori Kersey, “10 Years After Chemical Spill, Concerns Remain for Future Incidents,” West Virginia Watch, January 9, 2024. This is especially true when projects are financed by for-profit corporations that earn a rate of return on their investments.⁵³Zhang et al., “Water Pricing and Affordability,” 511. A report prepared for the Appalachian Regional Commission estimated that fixing West Virginia’s drinking water infrastructure would cost around $1.73 billion.⁵⁴Ahmed Rachid El-Khattabi et al., “A Twenty-Year Review: Revisiting the Drinking Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Funding Needs and Gaps in the Appalachian Region,” CO-21646-24 (University of North Carolina and Virginia Tech, 2025), 68, https://www.arc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Appalachia-Water-Infrastructure-2025.pdf.

For the past three decades, Puerto Rico’s primary public water service authority, PRASA, has staggered from one crisis to the next.⁵⁵Manuel Guillama Capella, “A Crisis in Broad Daylight: AAA’s Journey to Today’s Emergency,” El Nuevo Dia (PR), August 7, 2026; Sarah Mattalian, “In Rural Puerto Rico, Water Systems Depend on Volunteers—and Threatened Federal Grants,” Inside Climate News, August 1, 2025. These persistent infrastructure troubles are a manifestation of colonial neglect and disinvestment.⁵⁶Carlos de Loera, “With Puerto Rico’s Water Crisis, Climate Change Meets Ineptitude,” De Los–LA Times, August 14, 2025; Coenia Sanchez, “Congress Has a Responsibility to Reverse the Water Crisis It Caused in Puerto Rico,” In These Times, August 10, 2026. Despite being subject to all of the same federal regulations as states are, Puerto Rico receives less federal support and resources to meet these standards,⁵⁷Jane C. Timm, “Report: Puerto Rico’s Drinking Water at Brink of Crisis,” NBC News, May 10, 2017. leaving it struggling to pay for personnel and infrastructure upgrades while receiving millions of dollars in fines from the EPA.⁵⁸Mattalian, “Rural Puerto Rico”; “Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Authority Settlement,” EPA, updated July 1, 2026, https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/puerto-rico-aqueduct-and-sewer-addedauthority-settlement; US Department of Justice, “Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority to Spend More Than $195 Million on Improvements to 126 Drinking Water Plants,” news release, May 4, 2010.

Structural inequities craft a crisis that is not felt equally. Unaffordable water service disproportionately impacts low-income households, rural and other underserved service areas, and communities of color.⁵⁹Water Affordability Needs Assessment, 6, 10; Joe Brown et al., “The Effects of Racism, Social Exclusion, and Discrimination on Achieving Universal Safe Water and Sanitation in High-Income Countries,” The Lancet Global Health 11, no. 4 (2023): e609–10, https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00006-2; Rural Water Infrastructure: Better Agency Coordination Could Help Unserved Communities Address Their Needs, GAO-26-107355 (Government Accountability Office, 2026), 1, 13. In addition to the already deteriorating access to water, largely due to systemic racism and redlining,⁶⁰Katie Meehan et al., “Urban Inequality, the Housing Crisis and Deteriorating Water Access in US Cities,” Nature Cities 2 (2025): 93, 95, https://doi.org/10.1038/s44284-024-00180-z; Brown et al., “Effects of Racism,” e607–10. these communities face higher instances of unaffordable water bills,⁶¹Sandhya Kajeepeta et al., Water/Color 2023: An Update on Water Crises Facing Black Communities (Thurgood Marshall Institute, 2023), 4. years of underinvestment,⁶²Brown et al., “Effects of Racism,” e607. involuntary service shutoffs,⁶³Brown et al., e610; Mariana Sarango et al., “The Colour of Unaffordable Household Water: Racial/Ethnic Inequalities in Bills and Shutoffs Across Local Water Districts in Nine Urban Areas of the United States,” International Journal of Justice & Sustainability 31, no. 8 (2026): 1383–84, 1396, https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2025.2566516. more exposure to lead service lines,⁶⁴Anne E. Nigra and Anna Navas-Acien, “Racial Inequalities in Drinking Water Lead Exposure: A Wake-Up Call to Protect Patients with End Stage Kidney Disease,” Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 32 (2021): 2419–20, https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2021060793. and higher rates of many diseases and illnesses from dirty or toxic water.⁶⁵Brown et al., “Effects of Racism,” e610; Kajeepeta et al., Water/Color 2023, 6, 8, 9; Catharine Smith, “ ‘If White People Were Still Here, This Wouldn’t Happen’: The Majority-Black Town Flooded with Sewage,” Guardian (US), February 11, 2021; Brenna C. Kelly et al., “Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Risk from Industrial Surface Water Pollution in the United States, 2011–2021,” Health & Place 89 (2024): 2–3, 7–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2024.10334. Several studies also confirm how systems serving communities of color are more likely to experience drinking water violations in addition to experiencing inadequate enforcement of the federal water quality regulations.⁶⁶David Switzer and Manuel P. Teodoro, “Class, Race, Ethnicity, and Justice in Safe Drinking Water Compliance,” Social Science Quarterly (2017): 2, 8, https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12397; Yolanda J. McDonald and Nicole E. Jones, “Drinking Water Violations and Environmental Justice in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health 108, no. 10 (2017): e3–e4, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304621; Maura Allaire and Sarah Acquah, “Disparities in Drinking Water Compliance: Implications Incorporating Equity into Regulatory Practices,” AWWA Water Science 4, no. 2 (2022): 9, 10, https://doi.org/10.1002/aws2.1274; Junghwan Bae et al., “Drinking Water Injustice: Racial Disparity in Regulatory Enforcement of Safe Drinking Water Act Violations,” Race and Justice 15, no. 3 (2025): 338–39, 344, https://doi.org/10.1177/21533687231189854.

§ See Methodology for more information.

The US faces a water affordability crisis. Water bills will continue to increase faster than households can keep up, unless all levels of government take action to stop corporate abuses and support water affordability.

Local and state governments should:

• Ban water privatization and repeal pro-privatization legislation.
• Support local control of water systems and municipalization of corporate-owned systems.
• Prohibit public subsidization through water bills and the build-out of intensive industries controlled by billionaires in the technology, fossil fuel, and agriculture sectors.
• Hold polluters accountable for drinking water contamination and prevent new contamination from large corporations, including factory farms, fossil fuel corporations, hyperscale data centers, and the chemicals and plastics industries.

Congress and the federal government should:

• Hold polluters accountable for drinking water contamination and prevent new contamination from large corporations, including factory farms, fossil fuel corporations, hyperscale data centers, and the chemicals and plastics industries.
• Reject cuts to safe and clean water and restore federal funding to address the nation’s water affordability crisis.
• Fully fund safe and clean water in every community. Legislation like the WATER Act would create a trust fund to provide federal support at the level necessary to comply with federal drinking water quality laws.

Every person deserves access to safe, affordable water service, and families deserve action from their elected officials. Public officials must support safe, affordable, and locally controlled drinking water for every community in the country.