Charleston Water System warns county road projects could raise rates; asks council to press for funding

Charleston Water System (CWS) leaders told City Council on June 17 that planned county road and drainage projects — including the Lowcountry Rapid Transit (LCRT) corridor and the Highway 17/Main Road interchange — could require as much as $112 million in water and sewer relocations, work that CWS said would otherwise be borne by its ratepayers if not covered by other funding sources.

“Based on the current design plans ... our estimate is around $64,000,000 for our relocation costs” on the LCRT corridor, CWS CEO Mark Klein said, adding another “close to $20,000,000” in relocation costs for the Highway 17/Main Road interchange and related projects. Klein said the state’s 2019 Utility Relocation Act (Act 36) provides up to 4% of highway construction cost as offset for affected public utilities but that in large projects the statutory contribution is far short of actual relocation expense.

Klein said the LCRT design presents particular operational risks because the city’s primary transmission mains — two 24‑inch lines that supply downtown Charleston and other major feeder mains — run along corridors scheduled for widening and drainage work. “These are large mains, and they aren't easily taken out of service to relocate,” he said, adding that engineering and inspection fees would add several million dollars to the total.

Klein asked council to advocate to state legislators to extend or remove the sunset provision in the Utility Relocation Act (the current sunset date is July 1, 2026) and to consider asking Charleston County to include CWS relocation costs in the sales‑tax funded project funding mix so costs are shared more broadly rather than being placed entirely on CWS ratepayers. He said the utility finances such relocation work through bond debt, which disproportionately affects low‑ and moderate‑income customers.

Council members responded with concern. Councilman William J. Waring said the funding formula is inequitable because county sales tax revenue spreads cost across roughly 425,000 county residents and millions of annual visitors, while the water system’s relocation burden would fall on about 130,000 water accounts. Council members asked for support from the city as it discusses upcoming county referendum language and legislative outreach.

The presentation did not produce a recorded council motion or vote at the meeting; Klein requested the city’s “consideration to include Charleston Water System’s relocation costs” in county funding requests and urged council to press the state delegation to address the limits in Act 36. Council members expressed support for pursuing legislative and county‑level funding options in follow‑up conversations.

Klein also noted CWS is facing other regulatory and capital pressures — including a previously identified PFAS regulatory compliance cost that the utility estimated last year could increase rates substantially — and said layering relocation costs onto existing debt would further strain low‑income customers. The utility said it already averages about 200 shutoffs per day for nonpayment, underscoring the equity concern if relocation costs were financed by CWS rate increases.