Trouble in River City

Our vital water resources have not been managed well

When predictions are made about the economic development of our region, we most often see a list of such things as the strength of our financial institutions, higher education, health care, proximity to large population centers and, of course, the natural gas from the Marcellus formations.

Interestingly, rarely does anyone mention our abundant availability of fresh water. While we seem to take our remarkable water supply for granted, in the long run it could be our most important competitive advantage. As water tables shrink in many areas of the United States, as they are doing in numerous countries throughout the world, the Pittsburgh area is blessed to have all the water we will likely need for the foreseeable future. For instance, the city of Pittsburgh uses approximately 60 million gallons of water each day. Without additional infrastructure, the city has the capacity to draw, treat, store and deliver more than 100 million gallons per day. Inevitable water shortages elsewhere could weigh heavily in our favor when companies and people are making location and relocation decisions.

Despite this very positive picture, there is “Trouble in River City.” The stewardship of this vital resource by the city administration and the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority has been disappointing at best. While the mayor has appeared on “Undercover Boss” and championed bike lanes, the PWSA has mismanaged what could be our most valuable asset. As a result, the magnitude of the problem is staggering.

The PWSA is beset by a host of infrastructure problems in the water and sewer systems. Major leaks and equipment failures are becoming commonplace. And the reason is not hard to pinpoint. Most of the PWSA’s major pipes, large and small, are well past their design life of 70 years, with some dating to the early 20th century. An engineering firm study from 2011 recommended complete replacement of the water and sewer systems over a 40-year period at an estimated cost of $2.5 billion. The plan was not adopted by the PWSA.

In a recent performance audit, the Pittsburgh city controller echoed the 2011 engineering study findings and recommended the PWSA “establish a realistic and comprehensive line replacement plan of action for both water and sewer lines.”

There can be no doubt that the water and sewer systems face very serious problems that pose major threats to the ability to reliably provide water and sewer service for Pittsburgh residents and businesses. Equally as problematic as the very old pipes and equipment will be the difficulty of finding the money to replace the water and sewer systems. Eventually, users of the systems will bear most if not all of the costs.

Borrowing money or raising adequate revenue through service charges to fund the $2.5 billion project will be complicated by the fact that the PWSA’s debt already stands near $750 million and is headed toward $800 million this year. Bear in mind too that the engineering estimate was based on 2011 dollars — that is, not inflation-adjusted since 2011 or going forward — and the figure also assumes there will be no major cost overruns.

Residential water and sewer rates beyond the fixed allowance were raised 30 percent for 2017. That increase, along with the additional Alcosan charge of $6.90 per thousand gallons, puts the cost of a residential bill with 4,000 gallons per month at just under $90 and for 3,000 gallons at $71. Pittsburgh water and sewer were bills will now be among some of the highest for major cities. But even at the 2017 rates, there will not be nearly enough money to fund the cost of replacement.

A 20-year program of replacement will require $125 million per year (assuming no inflation or cost overruns) beyond the pace of capital outlays in recent years. Much higher bills will almost certainly be necessary to generate the revenue required for system replacement. Over time the bills might need to double from recent levels.

Clearly, raising the replacement funds through service charges will face enormous public and political pushback. Indeed, relying exclusively on water and sewer charges might prove to be impossible. In that case, the city might be forced to consider using its other funding sources to finish the project.

Government can never be all things for all people. Nevertheless, local governing bodies are obligated to provide certain basic services, including public safety, reasonable and fair zoning, and building regulations and inspection. We certainly expect to have a safe and reliable supply of clean water and sewage disposal. Anything less is unacceptable.