Bay Area households are served by some of the country’s most expensive water providers, according to a new analysis that found U.S. water rates rose 62% from 2015 to 2025. The report, released Tuesday by consumer advocacy group Food and Water Watch, examined the 500 largest community water providers. It ranks privately held San Jose Water Company as the nation’s costliest, with rates more than 2.5 times the national average. The company serves nearly 1 million South Bay residents. At the report’s standardized household usage of 60,000 gallons a year, a San Jose Water customer would pay an estimated $1,416 annually — a 163% increase from 2015. The estimate covers indoor water use and excludes wastewater charges; actual bills may be higher when outdoor use is included. Other Bay Area providers among the 15 most expensive nationally include the Marin Municipal Water District, the San Jose municipal water department and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Daly City ranked 26th, and its rates rose 308% over the decade — the largest increase among the providers analyzed. Thirteen California utilities made the report’s list of the 25 most expensive, with rates averaging more than twice the national average. The report’s authors point to the cost of replacing aging infrastructure, treating pollution and preparing for more extreme weather. In California, expenses can also include moving water hundreds of miles from the Sierra Nevada and developing supplies such as recycled water and desalination. “California is definitely overrepresented on the list,” said Mary Grant, Food and Water Watch’s water policy director. She said coastal communities in the Bay Area and Southern California can pay more to secure water. Utility officials cited local system costs and investments in reliability. San Jose Water said its rate increases are approved by the California Public Utilities Commission and that it is working to manage rising costs while keeping customer affordability in mind. The Marin Municipal Water District attributed its charges in part to a relatively small customer base, hilly terrain and extensive infrastructure. The district said its geography requires more lift stations and storage tanks. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission officials also cited the cost of providing safe, reliable water, while noting that San Francisco residents generally use less water than people in other areas. The report argues that private water companies generally charge more than public agencies and raised rates more from 2015 to 2025, in part because they seek a profit. But the authors say public providers also face growing expenses. Grant described rising water costs as an often-overlooked part of the affordability crisis, saying everyone needs access to water. She called for greater federal assistance with infrastructure costs so utilities do not have to pass as much of the burden on to customers. The report also warns that the expiration of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act could reduce support for water providers. Food and Water Watch said it conducted the analysis because water rates are not tracked adequately by the federal government. To compare providers, researchers calculated what households would pay in 2025 for the same annual volume of water, rather than relying on bills that vary with usage and may include other charges.