Harrisburg residents and businesses could face stormwater rate increases of at least 50% if Pennsylvania continues refusing to pay fees on state-owned properties.
That risk is part of a court fight between the utility and the state, with CRW arguing that costs tied to the Capitol Complex and other publicly owned properties are being pushed onto Harrisburg customers instead.
Here's what to know
According to WGAL, Capital Region Water has asked Commonwealth Court to determine that Pennsylvania must pay stormwater fees on Harrisburg state-owned properties. The utility estimates the state's refusal to pay is costing about $475,000 each year.
A key issue is runoff from state-owned sites, including water that drains off roofs, parking lots, and other hard surfaces. CRW says water enters the same Harrisburg stormwater system used by homes and private businesses, adding pressure to already strained infrastructure.
"This is about fairness to our customers," CRW Board Chairman Marc Kurowski said. "Those costs do not disappear simply because the property owner is the state, and our residents and businesses should not be forced to pick up the state's tab for essential services."
The utility's position is that when a large property owner uses the system without paying, the expense doesn't disappear — it either shifts to other users or leaves less money for needed system repairs.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
More background
Capital Region Water manages Harrisburg's wastewater and stormwater system, and much of that infrastructure is more than 100 years old. During heavy rain or snowmelt, that aging network can overflow, causing flooding and releasing untreated sewage and stormwater into the river.
CRW says stormwater fees fund upkeep for pipes, pump stations, and treatment facilities, and support projects intended to reduce runoff and protect local waterways. If that revenue disappears, some system improvements could be delayed.
The utility also says the issue could spread beyond the state, because other government and tax-exempt property owners are pursuing exemptions from stormwater charges after a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision.
If those owners stop paying, the utility said it could lose about $2.5 million annually — nearly 37% of its stormwater revenue. CRW says that kind of shortfall would put more pressure on family and business bills in Harrisburg while making an aging public system harder to maintain.
What's being done?
CRW's response is the lawsuit. Through the Commonwealth Court case, the authority is seeking a ruling that state-owned properties must pay for the stormwater services they use.
CRW says a win could preserve revenue needed for routine operations and longer-term infrastructure work. That money supports maintenance on essential equipment and runoff-reduction efforts designed to limit pollution and overflow in local waterways.
The outcome may also influence other exempt property owners weighing similar arguments after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision. If the court sides with CRW, the utility argues it could help keep more of the system's costs from being shifted to paying customers in Harrisburg.
If that support is lost, CRW has warned, residents and businesses may end up covering the gap through steep rate hikes.
As the case moves through Commonwealth Court, CRW Chief Executive Officer Charlotte Katzenmoyer summed up what Harrisburg customers stand to lose, saying, "Every property that contributes stormwater to CRW's system creates a cost that must be paid by someone."
Where can I learn more?
Fights over aging water systems often end with residents and businesses footing more of the cost. Recent coverage from Pennsylvania, Virginia, Illinois, Maryland, and Texas looks at rate hikes, disputed charges, and off-grid workarounds.
• In western Pennsylvania, rising utility costs pushed some residents toward rainwater tanks and van life.
• In Hopewell and Prince George, Virginia American sought nearly 30% water bill increases despite public backlash.
• In Illinois, a mayor warned some households already pay three times more amid a $142 million hike.
• In Cumberland, Maryland, officials moved ahead with water and sewer bill hikes over resident objections.
• In Potosi, Texas, residents challenged a $4,500 meter demand tied to water service.
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
