The Hoboken City Council narrowly approved an 8 percent water rate increase for 2026 and 2027 “to provide for the annual costs and to ensure that the system operates as a self-liquidating utility on a continuing basis” at last night’s meeting.
By John Heinis/Hudson County View
“We purchase bulk water from JCMUA [Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority]. In accordance to the agreement, our increased bulk water rate by eight percent, effective January 1st, 2026 and another eight percent is proposed for January 1st, 2027,” began Business Administrator Jennifer Gonzalez.
“So this ordinance incorporates the JCMUA bulk water rate increases. Looking at the memo in your packet and see that there are two types of increases that were ordained by the council previously.”
She further stated that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment occurs annually, while a non-CPI adjustment occurred in 2023, 2024, and 2025, which is outlined in a memo sent to the governing body.
2nd Ward Councilwoman Tiffanie Fisher asked “what percentage of the total cost to operate the water utility is the cost of water itself.”
Gonzalez said she would have to get back on the total percentage, to which Fisher said she felt like the eight percent should have been calculated on the water cost alone and the CPI calculated on everything else.
1st Ward Councilman Paul Presinzano then sought to clarify how the costs were broken down, noting that in 2022 using a gallon of water in the city would cost about $55, which is increasing to roughly $100.50 – not including next year.
“While I didn’t go as in-depth as Councilwoman Fisher did on this, when I look at these rates, I know we’re passing on and we’re adding the CPI as well, the rates in 2023 was 15.8, the rates in 2024 was 11.9, 2025 is 12.25, and 2026 is 11.37,” he explained.
“I just watched an election happen and everybody talked about affordability … everything we touch, somehow Hoboken’s gonna become more affordable, but at the rate of this, we can’t … I’m struggling a bit here, I know it’s a pass on, but the negotiation to get the water, they just told us that’s the price and that’s it or ?”
Gonzalez replied that it was accurate that the city does not have a say on the price of the water.
3rd Ward Councilman Mike Russo asked what the corresponding dollar amount was for the water rate increase between 2024 and 2025, to which Gonzalez said she did not have the numbers handy, but she would if the questions were given beforehand.
For that reason, Russo asked for his colleagues to join him in holding off on the vote.
” … To me, that looks like we’re overcharging the residents just to create a surplus, so I’d like to see what that looks like from ’23, ’24, and ’25, the dollar amount increase per year and what the surplus is per year, and then what our anticipated surplus is gonna be in ’26 and the utility so we can look at that for the 11 percent increase we’re looking at for ’26,” he said.
“So my contention is if we’re raising x amount of dollars, and we have x amount of dollars in surplus, I’d like to see our overall rates reduced so that it kind of washes a little bit. I don’t want to continue to make a surplus in this department, or in this utility, and then just move it into a general fund. I just don’t think that’s fair to our residents, I think we kind of need to cut costs along the way and figure our how we’re gonna do that.”
Russo reiterated that he wanted the agenda item pulled from the agenda and voted on at their next meeting, also questioning if it may be easier to keep track of by doing the rate increases year by year, instead of multiple years at a time.
Gonzalez answered that could actually make the process more complicated since the CPI is calculated at the end of every calendar year, though suggesting sending out a memo annually around that time.
5th Ward Councilman Phil Cohen, the primary sponsor and the council vice president, said he did not wish to remove the agenda item and therefore the vote proceeded.
Presinzano asked Council President Ruben Ramos if this was a vote to table or a vote on the second reading of the ordinance, to which Cohen called a point of order, stating questions were not permitted once a vote was in progress.
“There’s no discussion during a vote,” Cohen declared.
“Phil, I’m asking a question, you don’t make a vote if you don’t know,” Presinzano chided back, to which Cohen again called a point of order.
“Stop, Cohen, really? I’m asking what I’m voting on, you are ridiculous Phil, you are ridiculous Phil. You’re absolutely ridiculous,” Presinzano shouted.
Ramos asked Cohen to stop before stating they were voting on the item on hand, not a motion to table.
Presinzano walked off the dais after voting no and the measure ultimately passed 5-4, with Fisher, Russo, and 6th Ward Councilwoman Diane Imus also voting no.
