Council Rejects Water Bill Credit for Mt. Olive, Citing Fairness to Local Residents

Litchfield City Council Meeting | Oct. 16, 2025

Article Summary: The Litchfield City Council unanimously voted against a request from the City of Mt. Olive for a $3,675 water billing credit. Council members argued that granting the credit would be unfair to Litchfield residents and businesses who also suffered through the recent boil order without reimbursement.

Mt. Olive Water Credit Key Points:

• The Request: The City of Mt. Olive requested a credit for approximately 500,000 gallons of water flushed during the recent system-wide boil order.

• Proposed Amount: City administration calculated a potential credit of $3,675 based on the lowest tier rate of $7.35 per 1,000 gallons.

• The Vote: The council voted unanimously (0-8 with absences) to deny the motion.

• Council Rationale: Officials felt it was unfair to reimburse a wholesale customer when Litchfield tax-paying residents and businesses received no compensation for their losses.

A request for financial relief from a neighboring community was flatly denied by the Litchfield City Council on Thursday, Oct. 16, 2025, as officials drew a hard line on fairness regarding the recent water system issues.

The City of Mt. Olive, which purchases water from Litchfield, requested a credit for the water they were forced to flush from their system to ensure safety during the recent boil order. City Administrator Breann Vazquez presented a potential credit of $3,675, calculated based on the estimated 500,000 gallons flushed at the city’s lowest bulk rate.

“Breann does feel that this was a fair ask, as some of our water districts have a secondary water source… Mt. Olive does not,” the meeting minutes reflected regarding the administration’s initial presentation.

However, the City Council strongly disagreed. Alderperson Josh Hughes argued that providing a credit to another municipality would be a “bad look” when Litchfield’s own businesses and residents had to absorb the costs and inconvenience of the water issues.

“I have a hard time justifying giving money to another municipality when our people, our own citizens, suffered for it,” Alderperson Robbin Huffman said.

The council discussed the heavy impact on local commerce, noting that restaurants and residents had to purchase bottled water or flush their own lines without compensation.

“If all of our local businesses unfortunately had to eat whatever cost or whatever inconvenience… and we’re saying to them we don’t have the money to give anything back to you but we’re going to go ahead and give credit to Mount Olive… that feels like a bad look,” Hughes stated.

Vazquez acknowledged the difficulty of the situation, noting it would be fiscally irresponsible to offer credits to every residential customer in Litchfield, as it would likely necessitate a future rate increase to cover the loss.

Despite a brief discussion on tabling the matter to gather more data on the total financial impact of the water crisis, the council decided to settle the issue immediately. The motion to approve the credit failed with a unanimous “no” vote from all alderpersons present.